r300: Introduce rc_program and use it in radeon_pair
The goal is to convert both Mesa and TGSI programs into an intermediate format
that happens to be convenient for us.
Signed-off-by: Nicolai Hähnle <nhaehnle@gmail.com>
r300/compiler: Compile the compiler seperately into an archive
This is all part of untangling the compiler from the classic driver, so that
it may be used in Gallium without depending on Mesa stuff if possible
Signed-off-by: Nicolai Hähnle <nhaehnle@gmail.com>
r300: Detangle fragment program compiler from driver-specific structure
This is in preparation of sharing the fragment program compiler with Gallium:
Compiler code is moved into its own directory and modified so that it no
longer depends on driver structures.
Signed-off-by: Nicolai Hähnle <nhaehnle@gmail.com>
We weren't allocating enough gprs for the fragment shader
in some cases. There are likely other issues that still need
to be sorted out for textures, but at least they now work.
Remove commented-out opcodes. Remove information about API mappings
to opcodes, but add a reference to tgsi-instruction-set.txt where
that information is better presented.
Various opcodes which can be implemented trivially with other TGSI opcodes,
such as matrix multiplication and negation. These were not used by any
state tracker or implemented by any of the drivers.
This is a source of ongoing confusion. TGSI has multiple names for
opcodes where the same semantics originate in multiple shader APIs.
For instance, TGSI includes both Mesa/GLSL and DX/SM30 names for
opcodes with the same semantics, but aliases those names to the same
underlying opcode number.
This makes it very difficult to visually inspect two sets of opcodes
(eg in state tracker & driver) and check if they implement the same
functionality.
This patch arbitarily rips out the versions of the opcodes not currently
favoured by the mesa state tracker and leaves us with a single name
for each distinct operation.
Remove the need to have a pointer in this struct by just including
the immediate data inline. Having a pointer in the struct introduces
complications like needing to alloc/free the data pointed to, uncertainty
about who owns the data, etc. There doesn't seem to be a need for it,
and it is unlikely to make much difference plus or minus to performance.
Added some asserts as we now will trip up on immediates with more
than four elements. There were actually already quite a few such asserts,
but the >4 case could be used in the future to specify indexable immediate
ranges, such as lookup tables.
Nicolai Hähnle