Page 18 of 23 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 224

Thread: The State Of Open-Source Radeon Driver Features

  1. #171
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,046

    Default

    Can you guys give bridgman a break? I'm pretty sure he is not the one "we" need to "convince" and I for one appreciate his time spent here explaining why stuff happens.

    But then, I can't tell how serious crazycheese really is with all that smileys and humorous undertone.

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    Exactly the reason AMD shouldn't contribute to open source. Because of these idiots. Take the hint bridgman and only work on proprietary. And better yet, don't provide a driver for linux at all. Let them feel the squeeze.
    Seriously? Because of one or two people in some forum you would advise the world's second biggest graphics card company to abandon their support for the worlds's most prevailing operating system (When mips and arm boards with pci-express arrive, what graphics will work the first there?)? Do you hate freedom?

    edit:
    As for fglrx: google
    Code:
    fglrx "asic hang happened"
    10.300 results.

  2. #172
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisXY View Post
    But then, I can't tell how serious crazycheese really is with all that smileys and humorous undertone.
    I am dead-serious man. I love AMD and love ATI.

    My first AMD was am5x86-133, which I overclocked to 160Mhz by pumping bus to 40Mhz.
    When Nvidia Geforce 256 came out, I sold my Riva TNT2 and got first Radeon 64DDR exactly because they were canadian company and taiwanese Nvidia (remark due to already plenty of technology present in Taiwan, but only single competitive vendor outside, ATi) was destroying everyone (incl. 3dFX).

    And right now, after switching to Linux completely when MS showed its true face with Paladium in Vista times, I want that now merged company actually gets some marketshare as pioneer on opensource wave.
    But they just act like virgin schoolboys, unsure to do first steps. You can't lead, if you don't act like a lead.

    But if they continue coward cartel tactics, that luckily don't work anymore, since Google (amen!) broke the balance with Linux and produced a mirriad of startups of various juicy platforms, - all Linux or opensource based, nearly all gaming platforms, - they will sooner or later go bankrupt.

    Yeah, sorry, I withdraw from thread then. You have a point.

  3. #173
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Nobody here said that amd should open source their proprietary driver... If they did we'd just end up with a bloated buggy steaming pile of oss crap.... Remember the xfi driver? It would be something reminisent of that...

    I think AMD's oss efforts -are- on the right track. I like the oss drivers. They work well and are extremely stable. They just have long standing missing features.
    Last edited by duby229; 01-17-2013 at 05:55 PM.

  4. #174
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    43

    Red face

    Quote Originally Posted by duby229 View Post
    Nobody here said that amd should open source their proprietary driver... If they did we'd just end up with a bloated buggy steaming pile of oss crap.... Remember the xfi driver? It would be something reminisent of that...

    I think AMD's oss efforts -are- on the right track. I like the oss drivers. They work well and are extremely stable. They just have long standing missing features.
    Alright. And their infrastructure work on mesa/gallium3d isn't amd-specific, which doesn't just mean everybody benefits, it also saves costs in the long run: Once they change paradigms in hardware they can still use the infrastructure work on gallium3d, like the new radeonsi driver they're now writing.

    At this point, both feature-wise and performance-wise, gallium3d and the free drivers seem to be actually going somewhere. It used to be nobody would believe free 3d drivers would ever catch up but that's not the case anymore; now it seems like it's only a matter of time.
    Last edited by rvalles; 01-17-2013 at 06:07 PM. Reason: itallics consistence

  5. #175
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    But they just act like virgin schoolboys, unsure to do first steps. You can't lead, if you don't act like a lead.
    Well, but I understand it. Legal stuff can get easily ugly. I'd rather not know how much money samsung and apple alone have already thrown in the sinkhole that is the legal patent system.

  6. #176
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Just read an article on the front page that Fermi has video decode support in their oss drivers..... I mean really? It's ok for them, but it's really sad that they get it first. ARRRGGGGHH!!!

  7. #177
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Rural Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,030

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    Hello there! I did a small survey among friends asking them what would they choose: a driver that is open source but slower and doesn't implement all features or a proprietary driver that works just like in windows in terms of speed and functionality? They all answered proprietary.
    Small sample group, and an inherent bias in the questioning. Bad surveying, poor statistics.

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    From what I've read, your duty as an employee of AMD is to provide the most value to the company, that is contribute most to their bottom line. And how do you do that? By listening to your customers and serving their needs to your best ability. Your customers want the proprietary drivers. They don't care about this open source bullshit. They just want something that is equally fast to their windows driver. The radeon driver isn't it.
    I am a quite loyal customer and I do care, a lot. And I am not alone. You can not just write us off because of some flawed survey of your friends.

    Besides, that is what the Catalyst driver already provides with full support from AMD. Unhappy with the state of the Catalyst drivers? Bug the Catalyst team, and stop blaming the free drivers which have nothing to do with what you want to have in the first place.

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisXY View Post
    Can you guys give bridgman a break? I'm pretty sure he is not the one "we" need to "convince" and I for one appreciate his time spent here explaining why stuff happens.
    One word: yes.

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    And about that survey. Do you really not see how those results might be skewed or just feigning idiocy? You're asking stuff on phoronix which is full of fanatics (they call themselves idealists) about open source. I asked people who don't care what open source is. Those people are the majority. Go ahead. Ask people what would they choose. People who use windows and don't care about linux for example but would switch to linux if they could play games on it. Or people who are fed up with the move to windows 8 and would like something else but don't know about linux. See if any of them chooses the open source driver with 10% of the proprietary driver performance.
    Yes, his survey is flawed, but it is in fact less flawed then yours. My suggestion is for both of you to stop assuming you have any kind of real grasp of who wants what and just accept the fact that you are only arguing for what you yourselves want.

    Quote Originally Posted by duby229 View Post
    I think AMD's oss efforts -are- on the right track. I like the oss drivers. They work well and are extremely stable. They just have long standing missing features.
    Again, yes.

    Quote Originally Posted by rvalles View Post
    At this point, both feature-wise and performance-wise, gallium3d and the free drivers seem to be actually going somewhere. It used to be nobody would believe free 3d drivers would ever catch up but that's not the case anymore; now it seems like it's only a matter of time.
    Yes, yes, and yes.

  8. #178
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    I agree. If the world would just give me their money then I wouldn't have any problems at all.
    You will have a LOT OF problems, because you forgot that money is only an instrument to motivate people. Nothing more. They are worthless outside of the scope.
    If you remove money from people, they get angry.
    And you also forgot weapons.
    Angry people with weapons vs you with their money - its not going to end up good for you.

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    But this is not how it works. Why should they give you their code for free? Just because you want to? The damn thing costed millions of dollars to make. Why should they just give it away for free?
    They don't give it for free. They develop each series by accurately targeting market demands, starting from initial investment calculation via design, manufacturing up to selling where they get expenses covered and receive profit.
    I am buying their cards. They get money from me. Where is "free"? The driver software is in freedom form because its tremendously cheaper to adapt, its secure and it fuels the progress. But its not coming written for free.

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    Of course the world would be a better place if everybody just gave you what you want (from your point of view of course).
    I will nothing from you, receiving without giving is a crime.

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    But you see, not everybody is a communist (especially when they are on the receiving end), and some companies work for profit.
    Communism and capitalism are different approaches to same problematic, to commonwealth society. None of the approaches is flawless.
    Also, unfortunately communism has three major flaws that prevent it to apply efficiently on society level - that is - the authority must be equal to citizens(1), material equilibrium renders progress nearly impossible(2), everyone should be open on informational level (means no lying)(3). Capitalism has no less flaws, it forces overproduction, overconsuming, damaging concentration of material wealth, and... slavery by the means of private property. The civil american war between states is a prime example.

    If left without state control, both systems will unavoidably lead to power overconcentration and a totalitarian system.

    Fortunately, in most countries, regardless of the approach, the offsets are covered by laws. For example, in America, as per constitution, speech and information are discarded from term "capital".
    You can't own soul, you can't control speech, you can't own information.

    Also, information and information producer or carrier have completely different nature.
    Lets take word "apple" and real apple.
    If someone consumes word "apple" by mentioning it, the information will multiply. If someone leaves word "apple" alone, the information will vanish as less and less information carriers carry it.
    If someone consumes apple, it will be destroyed. If someone leaves apple alone, it will exist further.

    Hence capitalism is better applied to material nature (by means of private property and preservation) and communism to informational nature(by means of sharing and reuse).

    The problematic reappears again, as everything in IT is information and a process. So, workers, consume material goods to produce information, which in term can't be seen and sold as a capital.
    Stallman has already explained by means of GPL, that information must be free, yet production of information should not be(and is never) free.

    This is why - don't sell copies, but sell programmer time.

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    I am pragmatic. It's simpler to just make sure the proprietary works by not fucking with X.org so much than to convince AMD to open source their driver.
    I am nothing, I observe the nature of things and follow it. I don't carry pink or grey glasses, they deviate the observation.
    Simple does not apply to term "ideal", it depends on state of things.
    In this case, opensourcing the driver will produce vast platform advantage and compatibility of AMD solutions to all current and future systems.
    Basically, they have good hardware - if they make it easily supported everywhere, it will act like a glue.
    What the danger is, if they do it the wrong way, their investments in RnD will be lost by no one compensating it, but simply reusing - which is why the whole income model should be redone.
    Right now, people are purchasing their hardware solutions which compensate the costs for the driver development. Driver and feature customization can also be improved by software as service approach. I have mentioned it long ago, people will gladly pay for good opensource driver development if they see the results. For development outside of this scope they might deploy distributed cost locks - that is, the feature is unlocked once they get enough supporters/purchasers.

    Xorg is irrelevant, because it is underway to be aborted (and very probably rewritten). It is natural state of things, that at certain degree of complexity, when lessons are learned, it is better to abort everything and restart from scratch in order to eliminate underlying (architectural) problems. Xorg is no exception - thank you Xorg, bye Xorg, hello new Xorg.

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    And about that survey. Do you really not see how those results might be skewed or just feigning idiocy? You're asking stuff on phoronix which is full of fanatics (they call themselves idealists) about open source.
    I asked people who don't care what open source is. Those people are the majority. Go ahead.
    Where did you ask? In a pool of clueless people? To provide educated opinion, one should know BOTH ways equally good.
    You asked sheep. Recieved "Meee". Now you claim "Meee" to be the ultimate answer. Meee don't think so.

    Also, I repeat - Linux has proven the advantage of opensource. It advances things, where proprietary approach closes them down, separates them, drains their energy and lets them die irrevocably.
    Proprietary approach to information is like communism to society.

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    Ask people what would they choose. People who use windows and don't care about linux for example but would switch to linux if they could play games on it.
    If people switch to Linux just for the sake of switching, it must be their curiousity. Curiosity is a natural feeling which is HIGHLY DAMAGED by *habit*. And Windows is PREINSTALLED since MSDOS, it puts HEAVY meaning on *habit* - from being preinstalled, up to winapi. Result: windows people do not switch to Linux due to curiosity. Because they have lost it, thanks to microsoft!

    If people switch to Linux, because certain game is available there - they shouldn't, because games should be crossplatform and opensource demands that. Windows heavily uses *exclusivity* - a reverse meaning of *restriction*.
    Exclusivity is damaging factor, because its a straight way to slavery! However, inventor should be granted exclusivity for acceptable timeline, so he can compensate the costs, but NEVER if exclusivity results in freedom- or possibility reduction.
    For example, Siri was originally meant to be available on variety of platforms. Its developers would receive compensation for the work as exclusive inventors.
    However, once Siri was purchased by Apple, Apple restricted its usage only to own platform. This is damaging illegal method of "exclusivity".

    People actually switch to Linux, because it either fits better for the job, or because they are reverse-forced to - they run from tyranny. It does not restrict their freedom.

    Ideally, you shouldn't switch environment, because you have tons of curiosity, was able to compare different systems and current system fits you well. This is valid way.

    I don't feel well when a system postulates monopoly, gathers all technologies, destroys companies, drives the market and its users in a totalitarian choiceless way.
    For example, google monopoly is based on openness, innovation, absence of limitation and service. That's a good way. You make your choice!

    Then come games, yes!

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    Or people who are fed up with the move to windows 8 and would like something else but don't know about linux. See if any of them chooses the open source driver with 10% of the proprietary driver performance.
    You are one of them? Then I suggest you spend more time to understand the system deeply, just to understand why it has its current form, before you make any claims.

    Regarding opensource or not drivers - the formula is easy: More attention equals better driver.

    More attention may happen due to personal interest(direct or indirect) or financial interest(money, again direct or indirect). Ideally the code should get maximum attention without blocking the attention from flowing back.
    Hence proprietary companies reinvent same bicycles on constant basis instead of working on parts or unique variations.
    Recently they learned to lend bicycles though, although now they impose bicycle-lend-tax even on pedestrians, bar none.

    Every company wants more money, but forgets that money is only an instrument to provide innovation and commonwealth of the society.
    Because AMD agrees only with marketshare approach, but fails to seek ways to gain this marketshare we have a suboptimal drivers.

    And opensource driver performance is currently 50-80% of proprietary driver. That ONLY thanks to people not seeking "simple ways". So please suggest ways to improve it. We already have windows and know the damages.
    Last edited by crazycheese; 01-17-2013 at 07:37 PM.

  9. #179
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,366

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    AFAIK it was correct, although a couple of posts later we realized we were talking about slightly different "next steps" anyways. Airlied was talking more about full DPM; I was talking more about "finer grained static PM" especially in the case where power tables had very few entries.

    We agree on where we want to end up; I had just guessed that there would be some community-driven interim steps along the way and I guessed wrong.
    Thanks for the response.

    Ok, I re-read some of earlier posts in this "thread" (which is getting to be Tolstoy-esque in length) and you are right that there was a certain amount of talking past one another, but, when Matthew chimed in, and Dave then explained why they choose not to purse static PM further (the hope seemed to be that if they didn't improve the PM further there might be more push from the AMD side to get the relevant docs for talking to the PM system and they also seemed like they wanted to avoid further code review on any changes they make) the conversation kinda stopped.
    Assuming Matthew and Dave were right, I don't see why anyone would attempt to further improve the current PM implementation unless the effort were directed towards reverse-engineering. The amount of work and the expected results just don't make sense. Again, this is assuming they were correct.

    Best/Liam

  10. #180
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Rural Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,030

    Default

    This thread is like a checker board - one post is useful and relevant and then the next is bullshit. And the cycle repeats...

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
  •