| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|---|
| ... | |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
If we have something like to following in HLSL:
cbuffer C { Texture2D t; ... }
and we are compiling to GLSL, then both `C` and `C.t` consume the same kind of resource (a descriptor-table slot).
The way reflection was working right now, querying the index of `C` would return its binding (let's say it is `4` just to be concrete) and then a query on `C::t` would give its offset, which was being computed as `0` because it is the first field in the logical `struct` type.
That obviously leads to bad math and requires some subtle `+1`s in cases to get things right (e.g., when scalaring during lowering, I had to carefully add one in some cases).
It is unreasonable to expect users to deal with this.
This commit changes it so that the offset of field `C::t` is `1` so that hopefully more things Just Work.
The special-case logic in lowering is now gone.
One important catch here is that this pretty much only works in the case where the element type of a parameter block is a `struct` type (which is really all that makes sense right now).
If we ever want to generalize this in the future, then it will probably be necessary to change the `TypeLayout` case for parameter blocks to store a `VarLayout` for the element, rather than just a `TypeLayout`.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
- When assigning tuples `(a0, ...) = (b0, ...)` generate a tuple of assignments `(a0 = b0, ...)`
- Given an expression statement on a tuple `(a0, ...);` generate a sequence of statements `a0; ...`
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
- This really just checks two basic things:
1. Was there any global variable declared with `in` and `sample`?
2. Did any code encountered during lowering referenece `gl_SampleIndex`?
- This doesn't cover what HLSL could need, nor what we would need for cross-compilation. Consider it GLSL-specific for now.
- In order to generate the information with even a reasonable chance of being accurate (not giving a ton of false positives) I tried to integrate the checks into the lowering process (so they only see code that is referenced, one hopes).
- For this to work with my testing setup, I needed to make sure that lowering is always performed, prior to emitting reflection info
- This change broke several reflection tests, because they had been using code that wouldn't actually pass the downstream compiler. I checked in fixes for those.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
- Don't try to extract the body layout for a field without a layout
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
- The basic idea is that during the "lowering" pass, some types (notably: aggregate types that contain resource variables) will get turned into "tuple" types, which are pseduo-types that aren't meant to survive lowering.
- An attempt to declare a variable with a tuple type expands into a tuple of declarations
- An attempt to reference such a tuple-ified variable leads to a tuple of expressions
- An attempt to extract a member from such a tuple expression will pick the appropriate sub-element
- Dereference a tuple by dereferencing the primary expression
- Expand a tuple in the argument list to a call into N arguments (by recursively flattening the tuple)
- Don't create tuple types when not generating GLSL
- Make sure to preserve the specialized type of a call expression through lowering, since emission of unchecked calls relies on that info.
- TODO: maybe the infix/prefix/postifx/select information should come in as a side-band? Should we have modifiers on expressions?
- Make sure to offset the layout for a nested field based on teh base offset of its parent variable, when generating declarations for nested fields
|
| |
|
|
| |
I haven't tried to be 100% exhaustie, but this should cover the main cases we are likely to encounter in library code.
|
| |
|
|
| |
This helps avoid the problem where we emit a function that does a `discard` and thus get a GLSL compilation failure in a vertex shader (that doesn't even call the function).
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
- Try to handle `ErrorType` gracefully when computing type layouts
- When outputting a `TypeExp`, if the type part is errorneous (or missing), try to use the expression part
- Make sure to lower the expressions side of a `TypeExp` during lowering
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I hadn't been lowering `SV_Position` outputs to `gl_Position`, and had somehow been relying on hidden driver behavior that I guess made things Just Work.
This change adds some infrastructure to handle `SV_` semantics during lowering of an entry point (currently only covering `SV_Position` and `SV_Target`, FWIW).
As a byproduct, this also means that a `VarLayout` stores semantic info, which could conceivably be exposed through reflection data now.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
- Add GLSL mappings for more `Texture*` methods
- The annoying one here is `Texture*.Load()` because it doesn't take a sampler, but the GLSL equivalent needs one (while the SPIR-V does *not*). I've hacked this pretty seriously for now.
- Try to ensure that we add `uniform` to global declarations that need it in GLSL
- When outputting an `in` or `out` variable that might have been created from an `inout` shader parameter, filter the layout qualifiers that we output to only cover the appropriate resource kind.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
If the user had a shader entry point with an `inout` parameter, we would end up lowering it to two GLSL global variables with the same name.
This change adds a `SLANG_in_` or `SLANG_out_` prefix to the two declarations.
Note: I haven't dealt with the issue that we end up printing two different `layout` qualifiers on such a variable...
|
| |
|
|
| |
The earier changes to add sequence statements and change how the `isBuildingStmt` logic in lowering works doesn't work for this logic, which assumes it can just set `isBuildingStmt` and be sure that decls will go into the right place.
|
| |
|
|
| |
The tricky bit here was that the `reflection-json` output format isn't really a code generation target like the others, and we need to be able to have multiple "targets" active to make sense of it. This needs cleaning-up.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Code in Slang that is cross-compiled *might* introduce declarations that collide with language keywords that are reserved in the target.
This was previously being dealth with during final code emission, but the challenge there is that we want to allow user code that is being "rewritten" to use whatever identifiers it wants (they know better than us what is an error), and only apply renaming to our own code.
The approach here is to apply renaming during lowering - we validate each declaration to make sure its name is valid. Any expressions/types that refer to those declarations will automatically get emitted with the new name (while unchecked expressions will continue to be emitted with their existing name).
This isn't quite perfect, since we could in theory still rename a declaration in user code.
A more robust version down the line would try to determine if a declaration was nested inside code for the "rewriter."
Also note that this does *not* deal with any issues of name conflicts that might arise between modules. That would require a more complete and robust renaming pass, which seems tricky for me to pull off.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
If the user doesn't use any `import` declarations, there is no reason to parse their code at all, so having the option of falling back to `UnparsedStmt` can potentially save us some headaches down the road.
The new rule now is that if you have the "no checking" flag on, *and* the parser hasn't yet seen any `import` declarations, then it still used `UnparsedStmt` to avoid touching function bodies.
Otherwise, I go ahead and parse function bodies, and assume I can rewrite any code I can semantically understand.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
HLSL has the bad scoping behavior for `for` loops, and we need to respect that.
But, we need to have correct scoping for GLSL, and we'd like it for Slang.
We also need to ensure that `for` loops written in a "correct" language get the correct behavior when emitted as HLSL.
There was already code to handle this in the emit pass, but it was unfortunately using an `isRewrite` flag to try to tell if the HLSL behavior was wanted.
This doesn't work when the code being emitted might come from a mix of languages.
This change adds a distinct `UnscopedForStmt` syntax node type, and uses that when parsing HLSL input (bot not for other languages).
We make sure to preserve this node type through lowering, and then specialize our emit logic on this case.
With this, there are no more remaining uses of `isRewrite` in the emit logic, which is good because it didn't mean what I needed it to mean any more (since we now emit only a single module, that was merged during lowering).
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This is in anticipation of needing to have more complete knowledge to be able to handle user code that `import`s library functionality.
The big picture of this change is just to remove the `UnparsedStmt` class that was used to hold the bodies of user functions as opaque token streams, and thus to let the full parser and compiler loose on that code. That is the easy part, of course, and the hard part is all the fixes that this requires in the rest of the compielr to make this even remotely work.
Subsequent commit address a lot of other issues, so this particular commit mostly represents work-in-progress.
One detail is that this change puts a conditional around nearly every diagnostic message in `check.cpp` to suppress thing when in rewriter mode.
I have yet to check how that works out if there are errors in anything we actually need to understand for the purposes of generating reflection data.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
GLSL doesn't support `typedef` declarations.
The lowering code already lowered any named types (references to `typedef`s) to their underlying definition when targetting GLSL.
This changes makes sure that we also don't generate any lowered output for `typedef` declarations in the source program.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The existing code used a catch-all `visit()` method, and then relied on overloading to find the right version (allowing fallback to a `visit()` method taking a base-class parameter).
This approach works, but has some big down-sides:
- When browsing the code, you have a bunch of identically-named methods, and it can be hard to find the one you want.
- It is impossible to use inheritance to implement fallback for `visit()` methods, because *any* method in the derived class with that name hides *all* methods with the same name in a base class
This change makes the `visit()` methods use the name of the corresponding syntax class, and then has visitors inherit the fallback methods they need from the base visitor template class.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
- Handle all statement cases explicitly (rather than falling back to the "structural recursion" mess)
- Handle back-references from child statements to their parents
|
| |
|
|
| |
Most of these are cases we don't expect to encounter, but the big missing one was `TypeDefDecl`.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
The code should now compile cleanly with warnings as errors for VS2015 with `W3`.
Most of the changes had to do with propagating a real pointer-sized integer type through code that had been using `int`.
|
|
|
- The big change here is the introduction of a "lowering" pass that takes an input AST from the semantic checker, and produces an output AST suitable for emitting. The intention is that he lowering pass is responsible for:
- Stripping out unused code (when we have enough information to do so), by only outputting declarations that are transitively references from an entry point
- When cross-compiling to GLSL, generating a suitable `void main()` entry point to wrap the user-written entry-point function
- (Eventually) legalizing types in the program, by scalarizing aggregate types that mix uniform and resource types
- (Eventually) instantiating generic declarations so that the resulting code only deals with fully specialized declarations
- (Eventually) de-sugaring OOP constructs into basic "structs and functions" form
- (Eventually) instantiating code that depends on interface types at the concrete types chosen
- It is clear that there is still a lot of work to be done there, to this change is really about getting infrastructure in place without breaking the existing test cases.
- One cleanup here is that we get rid of the idea of whole-translation-unit output, since that was specific to HLSL output, and there is really no strong reason for keeping it. Users should now just ask for the output for each entry point that they wanted to generate.
- The biggest source of complexity for the lowering process is that it needs to produce the same AST structure as the input, to deal with the complexity of the rewriter case. That is, we need the output to be able to reproduce the input exactly in the case where we are rewriting and nothing needs to change, so the output format needs at least the degrees of freedom of the input.
- As a result, we end up having to distinguish "rewriter" and "full" modes in both lowering and code-emit steps, so that we can react appropriately.
- Generating a GLSL `main()` also adds a lot of complexity. Right now I'm using the simplest approach, where we always output the Slang/HLSL entry point as an ordinary function (as written) and then emit a simple GLSL `main()` to call it. I generate globals for all the shader inputs/outputs (these need to be scalarized and have explicit `location`s attached), and then collect these into the `struct` types of the original parameters as needed.
- This approach will start to have some major down-sides once we have to deal with "arrayed" input/output
- A long-term question here is how to replace entry-point parameter types with scalarized and/or "transposed" versions, while still letting the original code work as written (including copying those inputs to temporary arrays)
- Split `BlockStatementSyntaxNode` into:
- `BlockStmt` which just provides a scope around a `body` statement
- `SeqStmt` which just allows multiple statements to be treated as one
- Change how we emit `for` loops, to deal with the case where the initialization part might expand into multiple statements
- Basically `for(A;B;C) {D}` becomes `{A; for(;B;C) {D}}`, so we can handle arbitrary statements for `A`
- As an additional wrinkle, when we are rewriting HLSL, we just generate `A; for(;B;C) {D}` to deal with the broken scoping there
- This change is needed because the lowering pass was sometimes expanding the original initialization statement `A` into a block `{A}`. Certainly if it declared multiple variables we'd need to handle it, and this seemed the easiest way
- A more significant challenge for lowering would come if/when we ever wanted to support true short-circuiting behavior for `&&` and `||`
- For right now I'm not changing the behavior of the "rewriter" mode, so we still have `UnparsedStmt` instances being generated, but it is clear that eventually we need to parse *all* input, even if we can't type-check 100% of it. This is required so that we can rewrite user code that might refer to a shader input with interface type.
|
