|
* Add basic support for Shader Model 6.3 profiles
This adds `vs_6_3` and friends as available profiles, but doesn't add any new builtins specific to Shader Model 6.3.
In order to better support the ray tracing shader stages, Slang will not automatically map any attempt to compile a DXR shader up to SM 6.3 (the shader model officially required for these stages) and to the `lib_*` profiles (because there are no stage-specific profiles for these cases).
As an added detail, when invoking `dxcompiler.dll` to generate DXIL for DXR shaders, specify an empty entry-point name, since that is expected for `lib_*` profiles.
* Fixup: don't drop [shader(...)] attributes
The previous change makes the "effective profile" for DXR compiles no longer include a stage, but we had been using the stage stored on the effective profile in exactly one place: when determining what to output for a `[shader("...")]` attribute.
This fixup makes it so that we use the stage from the profile on the entry-point layout instead, which seems like the right choice anyway, if we are ever going to emit multiple entry points at once.
|
|
* Typo
* Add [shader(...)] and clean up some literal handling
* Add supporting for validating the `[shader(...)]` attribute, by checking that its argument is a string literal that names a known shader stage.
* Split the `ConstantExpr` class into distinct subclasses rooted at `LiteralExpr`, so we have `BoolLiteralExpr`, `IntegerLiteralExpr`, `FloatingPointLiteralExpr`, and `StringLiteralExpr`
* Add a `String` type to the stdlib, to be used as the type of a string literal.
This change allows code using `[shader(...)]` to be accepted by the front-end again, but it does nothing about emitting it in final HLSL.
* Allow entry points to be specified via [shader(...)]
Before this change, the compiler would track a list of `EntryPointRequest` objects, based on what the suer specified via API and/or command-line options. Each entry point request would get matched up with an AST `FuncDecl` as part of semantic checking, and then the back end steps (layout, codegen, etc.) would work from that information.
This change makes the compiler modal, in that it can *either* continue to use an explicit list of entry point requests (this is the mode when the list is non-empty), or it can rely on user-supplied attributes on entry point functions to drive codegen (this is the mode when the list is empty).
User-specified `[shader(...)]` attributes are processed at the same place where the association from `EntryPointRequest`s to `FuncDecl`s would otherwise be made, and basically does the same thing in the opposite direction: looks for `FuncDecl`s with the appropriate attribute and synthesizes an `EntryPointRequest` for them.
Subsequent processing should ideally not know where a given `EntryPointRequest` came from, and should handle both methods of specifying the entry points equivalently.
One design choice that might not make immediate sense is that we do *not* process a function as an entry point (applying further validation, etc.) just because it has a `[shader(...)]` modifier, unless we are in the appropriate mode (which in this case is the mode where the user didn't specify their own entry points via API or command line). This is to handle cases where the user wants to explicitly compile only one entry point, so that they (1) don't want us to spend time validating code they don't care about, (2) don't want do get output they don't expect, and (3) might actually be presenting us with code that violates the language rules due to a combination of `#define`s in effect (e.g., they might have a `[shader("vertex")]` function that transitively executes a `discard` because of how the preprocessor was configured, but they don't care because they are compiling a fragment entry point). This decision might be something we revisit over time.
As part of this work, I had to add some logic to pick a "profile version" to use for a combination of a target and stage (because when you specify `[shader("vertex")]` the compiler can't tell if you want `vs_5_0`, `vs_5_1`, etc.). This isn't really complete right now, because something like `-target dxbc` *also* doesn't determine a profile, so there is a bit of a kludge at present. We need to figure out a good long-term plan here, which might involve keeping target format, feature level/version, and pipeline stage as truly orthogonal concepts, rather than conflating them. That would involve more work in the API and command-line layers to de-compose things when the user specifies, e.g., `vs_5_1`, but might make downstream logic easier to manage.
* Emit [shader(...)] attribute on entry point for SM 6.1 and later
This should help ensure that the output from Slang can be compiled with dxc `lib_*` profiles.
* Fix warning
|
|
- Add shader model 6.0, 6.1, and 6.2 targets
- Add DXIL and DXIL assembly as output formats
- Add header for DXC API to `external/`
- Add `dxc-support.cpp` that wraps usage of the API
- Add `-pass-through dxc` option, equivalent to what we have for `fxc`
Notes:
* This does *not* include any logic to add `dxcompiler.dll` to our build process; that is way out of scope for the build complexity I'm ready to deal with
* For right now, the use of `dxcompiler.dll` is hard-coded, and it must be discoverable in the current executable's search path; options to customize can come later
* The `-pass-through` option is kind of silly because the code doesn't actually pay attention to the value (just whether it is set). If you set it to `fxc` but ask for DXIL, we pass through `dxc` anyway.
|
