On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 2:03 AM Zebediah Figura <z.figura12(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Signed-off-by: Zebediah Figura <zfigura(a)codeweavers.com>
---
dlls/d3dcompiler_43/d3dcompiler_private.h | 2 ++
dlls/d3dcompiler_43/utils.c | 14 ++++++++++++--
2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/dlls/d3dcompiler_43/d3dcompiler_private.h
b/dlls/d3dcompiler_43/d3dcompiler_private.h
index 23eff210940..2ff019d45a6 100644
--- a/dlls/d3dcompiler_43/d3dcompiler_private.h
+++ b/dlls/d3dcompiler_43/d3dcompiler_private.h
@@ -786,6 +786,8 @@ enum hlsl_ir_expr_op {
HLSL_IR_UNOP_POSTINC,
HLSL_IR_UNOP_POSTDEC,
+ HLSL_IR_UNOP_IDENT,
+
HLSL_IR_BINOP_ADD,
HLSL_IR_BINOP_SUB,
HLSL_IR_BINOP_MUL,
diff --git a/dlls/d3dcompiler_43/utils.c b/dlls/d3dcompiler_43/utils.c
index 4bc3b9b0a64..b5422abd1e8 100644
--- a/dlls/d3dcompiler_43/utils.c
+++ b/dlls/d3dcompiler_43/utils.c
@@ -1448,6 +1448,7 @@ struct hlsl_ir_node *add_assignment(struct list *instrs, struct
hlsl_ir_node *lh
{
struct hlsl_ir_assignment *assign = d3dcompiler_alloc(sizeof(*assign));
struct hlsl_type *lhs_type;
+ struct hlsl_ir_node *copy;
DWORD writemask = 0;
lhs_type = lhs->data_type;
@@ -1511,7 +1512,7 @@ struct hlsl_ir_node *add_assignment(struct list *instrs, struct
hlsl_ir_node *lh
lhs = lhs_inner;
}
- init_node(&assign->node, HLSL_IR_ASSIGNMENT, lhs_type, lhs->loc);
+ init_node(&assign->node, HLSL_IR_ASSIGNMENT, NULL, lhs->loc);
assign->writemask = writemask;
assign->lhs.var = load_from_node(lhs)->src.var;
hlsl_src_from_node(&assign->lhs.offset,
load_from_node(lhs)->src.offset.node);
@@ -1528,7 +1529,14 @@ struct hlsl_ir_node *add_assignment(struct list *instrs, struct
hlsl_ir_node *lh
hlsl_src_from_node(&assign->rhs, rhs);
list_add_tail(instrs, &assign->node.entry);
- return &assign->node;
+ /* Don't use the instruction itself as a source, as this makes structure
+ * splitting easier. Instead copy it here. Since we retrieve sources from
+ * the last instruction in the list, we do need to copy. */
Not just that, what we now define as an assignment (really a STORE)
doesn't really make sense anymore as a source.
The need to copy the instruction is a bit annoying though. What about
storing the result into a temporary variable and adding an extra load
instead? Does it make struct splitting hard / impossible (e.g. along
the lines of: replace this instruction with this other instruction and
the copy -> now we need to replace the copy -> back to square one)?
If the temporary var + extra load solution doesn't fly, I guess this
could be the rare case where the unary + comes in handy, instead of
making up a new operator.