Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 35 of 35

Thread: Intel's OpenCL Beignet Project Is Gaining Ground

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mrugiero View Post
    EDIT: Anyway, I want to know of the other reasons to use Gallium you thought about.
    There are various cool tech things built on top of Gallium that all gallium drivers can take advantage of, but Intel drivers can not.

    For example, there's the on screen HUD that Marek wrote a while back to display stats on the screen. Or there's the Direct3D9 backend. It's unlikely Intel will ever create something like that for their own driver because of legal reasons, but they could have taken advantage of the free community work. Instead, they'll be stuck with the same D3D -> OGL wine translation that the binary drivers need.

    Further, if the intel drivers merged into gallium there is a fair amount of cleanups that could be done to the rest of the Mesa codebase. Given that Intel is essentially the only classic driver left, or at least the only modern one that is running shaders.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by duby229 View Post
    You can take that as two examples of code sharing that Intel has chosen not to participate in. Don't misunderstand me, Intel has every right to want their OSS drivers to work with their OSS solutions. I'm fine with that. Plus they do contribute a lot of code to a lot of projects. Nobody can really fault Intel for their OSS commitment.

    I do feel that there is an argument to be made for Intel to port their OSS driver to gallium due to the potential it would have on improving the whole stack. But that is really selfish of me to want.
    I'm not discussing anything of that, so I don't know why you keep answering me on that subject; I thought my previous post clarified that. I just want to know about the other benefits using Gallium might bring, aside from the shared code itself. I'm not trying to deny Intel directly tries to not share code.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mrugiero View Post
    I'm not discussing anything of that, so I don't know why you keep answering me on that subject; I thought my previous post clarified that. I just want to know about the other benefits using Gallium might bring, aside from the shared code itself. I'm not trying to deny Intel directly tries to not share code.
    I'm not going to and I've explained why. Intel doesnt have any obligation to do anything other than what they think is best for themselves. And what they've done so far has mostly benefited everyone. I can't fault them for their commitment so I won't.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by duby229 View Post
    I'm not going to and I've explained why. Intel doesnt have any obligation to do anything other than what they think is best for themselves. And what they've done so far has mostly benefited everyone. I can't fault them for their commitment so I won't.
    OK, but be aware that I'm not asking "why should Intel change their mind", I'm interested in knowing, just that.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    For example, there's the on screen HUD that Marek wrote a while back to display stats on the screen.
    Which is something I use all the time.

Posting Permissions

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