Oh,great to hear kernel is mostly ready and userspace is progressing nicely and all. Thank you very much guys for the info and for all the work. Can't wait untill I can use and help test the open-source drivers on the laptop.
Oh,great to hear kernel is mostly ready and userspace is progressing nicely and all. Thank you very much guys for the info and for all the work. Can't wait untill I can use and help test the open-source drivers on the laptop.
IIRC there was a thread about Antialiasing, and noone had the right answers, so someone decided to add that line as a reminder.
Unfortunately the matrix doesn't say whether it's about primitive antialiasing, FSAA or MSAA.
FSAA is a software-feature (use a bigger, rotated framebuffer, scale back after drawing) so if would be a mesa feature, not driver-specific. MSAA requires hardware support. Primitive AA.. no idea, probably done with shaders (-> mesa feature), but I don't think anyone uses that any more.
AA support is just not implemented yet. The hw details are in the reg specs and accel guides.
Yep. The knowledge already exists, of course, it's just spread around tens of millions of lines of code and (temporarily, at least) the heads of hundreds of developers, and it would take dozens of people to find and extract that information. Alex and Richard do work with the hardware and proprietary driver teams but since most of the design work for a new chip happens 1-2 years before launch it's hard to find anyone who remembers the details -- and the proprietary driver code is *way* too big to be much help when looking for the "one bit you missed".
Now that we are more or less caught up with new hardware introduction we're going to see if we can combine the open source driver design effort with the proprietary driver design activities, so we can find "the right heads" more efficiently. Don't know how well that will work but hopefully over the next year we can make that happen.
In that case, I didn't know what you meant. I thought the situation was something like, "we now know how to correctly program these chips within the OSS design". Instead, it seems that you were actually missing hardware details.
Now, this comment obviously comes from somebody whose coding skills go no further than solving equations in python, but, if some OSS developers have access to the millions of lines of code you talk about, i.e. they work not only from the released documentation but also from closed code, how do they manage to restrict themselves and not implement the solutions adopted in the closed driver? Are the drivers so different in complexity, size and design that there are no low hanging fruits to be taken from that information? Not that I doubt of their professional integrity, of course : )