Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31

Thread: AMD Already Adds On Two Open-Source Developers

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,321

    Default AMD Already Adds On Two Open-Source Developers

    Phoronix: AMD Already Adds On Two Open-Source Developers

    AMD's John Bridgman has now confirmed that they have hired two open-source developers. These two new development hires was done previous to the announcement a few days ago that they are still looking for another open-source developer to work on their open-source Linux (kernel DRM, Mesa / Gallium3D, DDX) stack for Radeon graphics hardware...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTQ0Nw

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    143

    Default

    What is AMD's goal with hiring more open source developers? Don't get me wrong, this is indeed great news, but they must have some vision for the driver since they do this.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    15

    Default

    Since they are hired by AMD, does that mean they can access the intel to create a better open-source driver, or are they on their own because that kind of intel is reserved to closed-source driver devs ?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,926

    Default

    AMD OSS devs like agdf have access to everything, and can discuss everything in detail with the closed-source devs.

    This doesn't automatically mean that they can simply take the Catalyst code, or implement anything they want (like UVD).

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,926

    Default

    Actually, I don't think that any of the problems with the current AMD OSS driver have anything to do with the lack of information. The main problems are:

    - lack of manpower, where this will help
    - they are still behind when it comes to the very latest hardware, although this gap is shortening rapidly. New developers will be helpful here too
    - the general state of Mesa does not allow for OpenGL3, especially the GLSL compiler is the bottleneck. Here the strategy seems to be to wait for Intel to finish this. I don't know if general Mesa development is in AMD's plans.

    EDIT: All this is from an interested observer, I'm not an insider. Take it with a truck of salt.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,590

    Default

    what i am curious about is if this new team will work only on the close to the kernel stuff (DRM) or if they are going to help with mesa/G3D state trackers

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,385

    Default

    Lots of good questions. Here are some quick answers :

    The main impetus for hiring additional developers now was interest in the open source drivers from our embedded customers -- not just embedded Linux users (where there's an obvious fit) but customers using other OSes and using the open source drivers as a starting point for implementing support in their own environment.

    Our embedded customers have a slightly different set of priorities from "desktop" users although there is a fair amount of overlap -- so the idea is that the new developers will be part of the same team but we will now be able to spend more time on embedded business priorities rather than just setting priorities based on Phoronix forum posts

    The new developers will work the same way that Richard and Alex did - with direct access to hardware design info, direct access to hardware and software developers, and as-needed access to Catalyst driver source code.

    You probably remember that back in 2008 we put a lot of effort into using our proprietary code as a foundation for open driver work (we tried both tcore and the hardware layer for the new OpenGL driver) but in both cases we found that the differences in size and internal architecture made this much less effective than it first appeared.

    The new developers will work on kernel, x and mesa drivers / state trackers, and hopefully a bit more on the common code as well.

    Stupid one minute edit limit. I think I'll put that in my signature

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,590

    Default

    Bridgman are there any customers of yours that use g3d as their graphic stack???

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    989

    Default

    Well, here's to hoping that one of your "embedded customers" is willing to sink millions to help you guys work on Gallium3d-based desktop OpenGL, rather than going off somewhere in the tumbleweeds and having you work on some specific embedded technology, like Android support for AMD Fusion. That'd be cool and all, but (1) probably not open source, and (2) useless to me.

    It's not like I'm a real customer anyway; I've only sunk about $2000 in graphics cards over the last 5-6 years....

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,385

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 89c51 View Post
    Bridgman are there any customers of yours that use g3d as their graphic stack???
    I don't know if any customers are using the Gallium3D paths today but I expect that some of them are and the rest will flip over pretty quickly.

    Quote Originally Posted by allquixotic View Post
    ...rather than going off somewhere in the tumbleweeds and having you work on some specific embedded technology, like Android support for AMD Fusion. That'd be cool and all, but (1) probably not open source, and (2) useless to me.
    There is a fair degree of overlap between embedded and desktop priorities -- I wouldn't worry. Anyways, there's very little difference between what Android needs and what a desktop user running Wayland needs - it's just the plumbing that is different. We use the same core GPU technology between Fusion and discrete parts so no split there either.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •