As the resolver currently enforces in-order declarations, this does not
change the declaration order from iterating over the
ast::Module::GlobalDeclarations.
The MSL backend has been changed to use the
sem::Module::DependencyOrderedDeclarations list instead of looping over
different declaration types separately.
Bug: tint:1266
Change-Id: I698d612032285311017bfceab3c42adae1928a0e
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/79767
Reviewed-by: James Price <jrprice@google.com>
Kokoro: Kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
This removes a lot of awkward logic from the MSL writer, and means
that we now handle all module-scope variables with the same transform.
Change-Id: I782e36a4b88dafbc3f8364f7caa7f95c6ae3f5f1
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/67643
Kokoro: Kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
This is a major reworking of this transform. The old transform code
was getting unwieldy, with part of the complication coming from the
handling of multiple return statements. By generating a wrapper
function instead, we can avoid a lot of this complexity.
The original entry point function is stripped of all shader IO
attributes (as well as `stage` and `workgroup_size`), but the body is
left unmodified. A new entry point wrapper function is introduced
which calls the original function, packing/unpacking the shader inputs
as necessary, and propagates the result to the corresponding shader
outputs.
The new code has been refactored to use a state object with the
different parts of the transform split into separate functions, which
makes it much more manageable.
Fixed: tint:1076
Bug: tint:920
Change-Id: I3490a0ea7a3509a4e198ce730e476516649d8d96
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/60521
Auto-Submit: James Price <jrprice@google.com>
Kokoro: Kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
Commit-Queue: James Price <jrprice@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
Spread the array zeroing across as many workgroup invocations as possible.
Bug: tint:910
Change-Id: I1cb5a6aaafd2a0a4093ea3b9797c173378bc5605
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/60203
Kokoro: Kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Neto <dneto@google.com>
Also move:
test/fxc_bugs/vector_assignment_in_loop
to
test/bug/fxc/vector_assignment_in_loop
Change-Id: I7bbfc476fdb7a3296025609625e322fed8d16285
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/59444
Auto-Submit: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
Commit-Queue: James Price <jrprice@google.com>
Kokoro: Kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
Reviewed-by: James Price <jrprice@google.com>
Ben Clayton
James Price