Arrays can be extremely large, and having the load and store functions unroll the elements can make the complier explode.
Fixed: chromium:1229233
Change-Id: Ieb5654254e16f5ce724a205d21d954ef9a0cd053
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/58382
Kokoro: Kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Ben Clayton <bclayton@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: David Neto <dneto@google.com>
Auto-Submit: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
CloneContext::Replace(T* what, T* with) is bug-prone, as complex transforms may want to clone `what` multiple times, or not at all. In both cases, this will likely result in an ICE as either the replacement will be reachable multiple times, or not at all.
The CTS test: webgpu:shader,execution,robust_access:linear_memory:storageClass="storage";storageMode="read_write";access="read";atomic=true;baseType="i32"
Was triggering this brokenness with DecomposeMemoryAccess's use of CloneContext::Replace(T*, T*).
Switch the usage of CloneContext::Replace(T*, T*) to the new function form.
As std::function is copyable, it cannot hold a captured std::unique_ptr.
This prevented the Replace() lambdas from capturing the necessary `BufferAccess` data, as this held a `std::unique_ptr<Offset>`.
To fix this, use a `BlockAllocator` for Offsets, and use raw pointers instead.
Because the function passed to Replace() is called just before the node is cloned, insertion of new functions will occur just before the currently evaluated module-scope entity.
This allows us to remove the "insert_after" arguments to LoadFunc(), StoreFunc(), and AtomicFunc().
We can also kill the icky InsertGlobal() and TypeDeclOf() helpers.
Bug: tint:993
Change-Id: I60972bc13a2fa819a163ee2671f61e82d0e68d2a
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/58222
Kokoro: Kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
Reviewed-by: James Price <jrprice@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
Use the new semantic constant value information to significantly reduce the complex indexing logic emitted for UBO accesses.
This will dramatically reduce the number of `for` loops that are decayed to `while` loops.
Change-Id: I1b0adb5edde2b4ed39c6beafc2e28106b86e0edd
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/57701
Kokoro: Kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
Reviewed-by: James Price <jrprice@google.com>
Ben Clayton