Re: RFC: Re: shader IR vs. application IR from Dean Jackson on 2017-08-16 (public-gpu@w3.org from August 2017)

From: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 09:39:21 +1000
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: Kenneth Russell <kbr@google.com>, Corentin Wallez <cwallez@google.com>, David Neto <dneto@google.com>, "Myles C. Maxfield" <mmaxfield@apple.com>, public-gpu@w3.org
Message-id: <D811A948-DAAC-4D8F-901D-708B3865EF28@apple.com>

> On 17 Aug 2017, at 05:08, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
> 
> But bolting on security is not impossible; as you point out, it's been done for GLSL.

Restricting GLSL for security wasn't particularly difficult. It doesn't have pointers, for example. This is another argument for a language that is slightly higher than an IR: It probably will be easier to secure.

For the SPIR-V folks, has any implementation actually used Logical Addressing Mode? I'd also like to understand what these proposed restrictions to SPIR-V mean for compute shaders. How are they impacted by Logical Addressing Mode?

Dean

Received on Wednesday, 16 August 2017 23:39:57 UTC