Radeon OpenGL 2.0 support

[zeldaman55069]

So just wondering what is the gallium3d for r600/700 cards... I know that I can use fglrx but I like to make things as simple and open source as possible... If I had any idea how to do graphics programming I would start to help out(I can code a small amount in c and a good amount c++), better question... where would be a good place to start on anything like that?

[nanonyme]

So just wondering what is the gallium3d for r600/700 cards... I know that I can use fglrx but I like to make things as simple and open source as possible... If I had any idea how to do graphics programming I would start to help out(I can code a small amount in c and a good amount c++), better question... where would be a good place to start on anything like that?

Afaik hasn't really started. I'm not sure there's much documentation available, you could probably start by looking into the r300g driver. (including r600 classic driver's KMS-side to find out about the hardware-dependent code)

[mattst88]

since you decided to cripple my R500 card with open-source drivers

Who the hell does 'you' refer to?

Do you realize that nhaehnle doesn't work for AMD and does all this for fun?

And by the way, it's not crippling if it's never been supported.

Sorry, I just am _really_ tired of seeing ridiculous comments and accusations like this.

[madman2k]

Who the hell does 'you' refer to?

Do you realize that nhaehnle doesn't work for AMD and does all this for fun?

And by the way, it's not crippling if it's never been supported.

Sorry, I just am _really_ tired of seeing ridiculous comments and accusations like this.

I am referring to god and the blatant unfairness that nhaehnle does not fix the hunger in the development countries - he is a developer right?

seriously, I was referring to the guy I quoted in my post

[mattst88]

I'm going to press you on this.

You're claiming that bridgman crippled R500 support in the open source drivers? Tell me _when_ this happened. _When_ were they working perfectly for you?

[duby229]

They can't probably do full 3.0 but can also likely go over 2.1. (as in, they can likely accomplish *part* of the extensions required)
Edit: When people say "support for version X", it means support for full version X. You can still have almost all of the extensions available and this will Just Work as long as the application doesn't hit the extensions that aren't supported.

Which I suppose leads me to a question.... Lets say your running a card that doesnt support an opengl extension in hardware, but your running an application that uses that extension. Will it simply fall back to software rendering for that extension alone and continue running the rest in hardware?

[bridgman]

It depends on the extension. Some extensions actually do things (draw, compress/decompress etc..) so performing only those extension calls in software is feasible, but many extensions change the way that other drawing operations are handled -- so all of the subsequent drawing operations would need to be done in software as well.

In those cases it might be better if the driver did not support the extension at all, or supported it and effectively ignored it.

[agd5f]

Apps are supposed to check if the driver supports an extension before using it.

[pvtcupcakes]

I'm going to press you on this.

You're claiming that bridgman crippled R500 support in the open source drivers? Tell me _when_ this happened. _When_ were they working perfectly for you?

He's saying that AMD stopped supporting R500 in fglrx I believe. So he has to use the open driver which doesn't support OpenGL 2 like fglrx did.
I think Ubuntu 9.04 has a special fglrx that supports R500 though...

[agd5f]

fglrx will still work with his hardware if he doesn't mind using a supported kernel and xserver.