Reply With QuoteWell, you gotta love Gallium3D because once the state tracker is there; it is there for ever and for every card that has a driver out there.
Phoronix Member
Oh, I'm running fglrx (5850 owner); I don't have any philosophical opposition to closed source software. I was just curious if there was a pure OSS way of doing OpenCL, since I know there are people out there who prefer to do things that way.Originally Posted by bridgman
I did download the Stream SDK and will be looking through the OpenCL docs on the AMD website, though, so thanks!
Senior Member
Well, you gotta love Gallium3D because once the state tracker is there; it is there for ever and for every card that has a driver out there.
Senior Member
think that is only partly true... since if for instance openCL requires features in the hardware driver that no other state tracker has needed yet that would still have to be implemented in the driver so drivers still have to be worked on independantly to some degree though probably not nearly as much as before.... thats just how it seems to me.
Senior Member
yeah you are rigth gallium won't provide 100% for the code for the 100% of the hardware outhere, the trackers contains the most common code that is pretty much hardware independant, ofc after the trackers is there you need the driver of that piece of hardware to be aware of that trackers.
is pretty much like mesa(common code hardware independant) and dri/drm/kms(hardware dependant code )
Senior Member
Re: video playback acceleration.
If there were a fully working Gallium OpenCL state tracker, it would be feasible for someone to write an OpenCL version of the decoder for any video codec... and I'm about to start writing a thesis proposal to do just that (with VP8). I'm planning on targeting Nvidia+AMD's OpenCL run-times/libraries, but the moment there's a working Gallium OpenCL state tracker, it would work there too.
Of course, I'll need to actually get the proposal written up, approved, and an advisor will need to be found, but it should work.... and hopefully it'll be simpler to code/maintain than a full OpenGL+GLSL implementation (which has been partially done for h.264). Hopefully the overhead won't kill the performance too much.
Banned
nvidia just failt to dev a shader based acceleration metod..
Moderator
They had no reason to build one. If you want to use GLSL acceleration that still can be done on a 8800 GTS. XBMC has had this option available for quite some time now.
Senior Member
I'm not sure whether shader-based decode acceleration is very useful. VLD cannot be accelerated, but this is a very CPU-intensive task, especially when CABAC is used and at high bitrates - and that's where decode acceleration is most needed!
As far as I know the shader-based acceleration implementations that exist already need quite a bit of shader horsepower. So, no acceleration on low-end GPUs or IGPs. Plus, much power consumption.
AMD Linux
I haven't actually seen any shader-assisted H.264 decode implementations in public yet, have you ?
It's very common to use shaders for render aka presentation (scaling, colour space conversion, post processing etc...) but I haven't seen anything that does MC, deblock and loop filtering on shaders and everything further upstream on CPU.
Junior Member
Is there really so much advantage doing decoding on GPU?
I was thinking about what is the big gain by doing video decoding on the GPU?
It will let people with weak cpu:s watch hd video, thats true. But less and less people have cpu:s that cannot handle hd video. So that reason for doing video decode on gpu is decreasing as time passes.
So by the time all this is implemented properly in OSS drivers. Maybe it is not all that useful for the big majority?
Is it consuming less power when doing video decode on GPU versus CPU? Its still the same amount of decoding that has to be done. So which processor that does it shouldn't matter? Right?
A lot of questions and maybe Im way out of line in my thinking...
