Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 104

Thread: 2013: A Good Year For Open-Source AMD?

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Old Europe
    Posts
    916

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    Nope. Same goes for all of the programming info... the best we can do is give rough estimates and confidence levels in cases where we have a specific list of tasks to complete before we can release, but this is more like UVD where we don't know what the outcome will be until the last minute.

    As soon as we get to the point where the remaining issues can be discussed in public, we release
    Thanks for answering.

    Btw, IIRC, you stated some years ago that R&D is trying to disentangle the problematic parts (DRM, etc.) as much as possible from the rest of the ASIC,
    but it will take some generations to take off. Is this something we will profit soon or has this strategy been dropped?

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,456

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by entropy View Post
    Btw, IIRC, you stated some years ago that R&D is trying to disentangle the problematic parts (DRM, etc.) as much as possible from the rest of the ASIC, but it will take some generations to take off. Is this something we will profit soon or has this strategy been dropped?
    The strategy has not been dropped, but the HW development pipe is pretty long and we're not redesigning blocks *just* for this.

    I expect the first change will become visible over the next 12-15 months, although I'm not sure we'll be able to tell you what specific changes we made. If all goes well you will see more HW info released and think "finally, what took them so long ?"

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,052

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    PM basically works by changing clocks and voltages to make power/performance tradeoffs that match the user's needs.

    For r600 and earlier the driver code set clocks and voltages directly. On most of the more recent hardware generations the driver can still set clocks and voltages directly but each generation has different hardware blocks added which can set those clocks and voltages automatically with guidance from the driver. So far we have not been allowed to release info for those additional HW blocks, although as with UVD we have been working internally to change that. The difference is that we started internal discussions about PM a couple of years ago, concluded that we were not going to get quick approval, and that's why the current PM code was developed.
    I think many people (like me) who say they would like better power management aren't even talking about automatically adjusting power levels to "match the user's needs". It's still that on "low" power level my HD 6550M drains more power than catalyst by default. (Last time I tried "low" it sometimes crashed so I used "mid" since then which seems to be exactly the same but at least appeared to be more stable).

    What I personally think should be the priority in power management is bringing the card down to the minimum power drain possible for the "low" profile.

    Code:
     % sudo su -c "echo low > /sys/class/drm/card0/device/power_profile"
     % cat /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/radeon_pm_info
    default engine clock: 600000 kHz
    current engine clock: 299970 kHz
    default memory clock: 800000 kHz
    current memory clock: 299950 kHz
    voltage: 900 mV
    PCIE lanes: 16
     % sudo su -c "echo mid > /sys/class/drm/card0/device/power_profile"
     % cat /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/radeon_pm_info
    default engine clock: 600000 kHz
    current engine clock: 299970 kHz
    default memory clock: 800000 kHz
    current memory clock: 299950 kHz
    voltage: 900 mV
    PCIE lanes: 16
    Last edited by ChrisXY; 05-25-2012 at 12:04 PM.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    319

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisXY View Post
    I think many people (like me) who say they would like better power management aren't even talking about automatically adjusting power levels to "match the user's needs". It's still that on "low" power level my HD 6550M drains more power than catalyst by default. (Last time I tried "low" it sometimes crashed so I used "mid" since then which seems to be exactly the same but at least appeared to be more stable).

    What I personally think should be the priority in power management is bringing the card down to the minimum power drain possible for the "low" profile.

    Code:
     % sudo su -c "echo low > /sys/class/drm/card0/device/power_profile"
     % cat /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/radeon_pm_info
    default engine clock: 600000 kHz
    current engine clock: 299970 kHz
    default memory clock: 800000 kHz
    current memory clock: 299950 kHz
    voltage: 900 mV
    PCIE lanes: 16
     % sudo su -c "echo mid > /sys/class/drm/card0/device/power_profile"
     % cat /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/radeon_pm_info
    default engine clock: 600000 kHz
    current engine clock: 299970 kHz
    default memory clock: 800000 kHz
    current memory clock: 299950 kHz
    voltage: 900 mV
    PCIE lanes: 16
    Yeah I suspect there are block on the gpu that fglrx powers off dynamically to get even lower than the min one.

    I'm not sure, if anyone was going to work on power saving I'd recommend the nouveau approach and reverse engineer fglrx rather than talking to AMD, and definitely try not be covered by an NDA.

    While improving the current code might be worth it for a while, its suboptimal in the long term, and reverse engineering fglrx would probably produce a much more useful benefit.

    Dave.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,676

    Default

    @bridgman


    is there still work being done for the UVD ???

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanL View Post
    Actually, it was brought up years ago: http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...3-Ban-Qaridium
    Watching him debate with bridgman and display mastery of the below techniques is entertaining once you get used to it. Q is just a part of the Phoronix scenery, like the beer references that some people can't stand.

    Ignore List doesn't really work for more advanced trolls, especially those who post at the rate of Q and are skilled at threadjacking.
    well the clue is to call a opponent with dissenting opinions a "Contrarian Troll" is the first step to be the Contrarian Troll LOL

    this is what your "text" includes ...........

    what have you to say in your defense?

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,456

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 89c51 View Post
    @bridgman
    is there still work being done for the UVD ???
    Yes, although we're not at the point where I can say anything more encouraging than before about chances of exposing the HW.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,273

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    well the clue is to call a opponent with dissenting opinions a "Contrarian Troll" is the first step to be the Contrarian Troll
    ...
    Accusing the accusers. When confronted with their trolling, trolls immediately respond that it is the accusers who are trolls.
    You made my day. Thanks.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Rural Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,030

    Default

    Just to add some common decency and politeness to this thread: I wish to offer my thanks to bridgman, agd5f, airlie, and everyone else who is working on improving these drivers. If it was not for your hard work we would not have anything to talk about here at all, and everyone should be grateful. I at least appreciate your efforts.

    Now, was that so hard everyone?

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,124

    Default

    Can you share with us _why_ this turns out to be problematic?
    I think it's obvious for the UVD blocks - but for the PM bits?
    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    Nope. Same goes for all of the programming info...

Posting Permissions

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