Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

My horrible experience with ATI

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by TrentZ View Post
    Wouldn't be better to ditch KCL and use (open-source) DRM instead? That way fglrx could support KMS also.
    In the DRM is the memory managment and many other stuff from ATI and i dont think they want/cant open it.

    Comment


    • #47
      The problem is that you would have to give up a lot of the performance advantages we get from the proprietary code, particularly the memory manager.

      The 3D stack is built around our own common code; moving the 3D driver onto the open drm would mean :

      (a) a lot of work to do the porting,

      (b) inability to use a common stack across OSes, ie more time spent maintaining Linux-specific 3D code and less time available to work on other Linux-specific stuff,

      (c) lower performance and stability under high load.

      Besides, look at all the grief Via is getting for trying to run a closed 3D driver over an open DRM
      Last edited by bridgman; 07-22-2009, 12:22 PM.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by mtippett View Post
        Simply because we don't plan for support of a new kernel until we are approaching the release of a distro-support update. Our OFFICIAL support comes out as part of the driver release. Depending on the requisite changes you may see support for a kernel earlier, but it definitely won't be announced or implied as a higher level of support.

        The 2.6.29 and 2.6.30 kernels have had quite a bit of impacting changes that have mean non-trivial changes. For AC/DC power switching there is still work that needs to be done.
        Impacting changes to what? Ok, for 2.6.29 the answer isn't too hard. But there are still some steps in betwenn.
        With the kernel releases the changes grow more and more. And with every release it should be harder to adapt the fglrx-driver. It should be a lot of easier to patch the driver early.

        And releasing those drivers doesn't mean official support automatically. AMD can support the drivers which fit to distributions and the rest is unsupported or beta.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by mtippett View Post
          Simply because we don't plan for support of a new kernel until we are approaching the release of a distro-support update.
          Apropos support, AMD shouldn't write into System Requierements "Linux kernel 2.6 or above" if it isn't supported.

          And where should bugs be reported so that they're noticed by the AMD/ATI-Developers? The xserver still can't be quit outside from X.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by PuckPoltergeist View Post
            Apropos support, AMD shouldn't write into System Requierements "Linux kernel 2.6 or above" if it isn't supported.
            Agree. IMO, this is a fraud, seriously.

            Please clearly indicate the range of the support kernels.

            Comment


            • #51
              Bugs should be reported to ati.cchtml.com

              We are gradually adding more "time-varying" information to the release notes. I agree that identifying kernels where problems are known at time of release would be a good next step.

              Just to be clear though, our "support statement", at the front of the release notes, is that we support released versions of RHEL, SuSE and Ubuntu distros, subject to the other requirements below, ie if you are running a released version of RHEL but your kernel is older than 2.6 then the driver would not provide support.
              Last edited by bridgman; 07-23-2009, 03:30 PM.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by PuckPoltergeist View Post
                And where should bugs be reported so that they're noticed by the AMD/ATI-Developers? The xserver still can't be quit outside from X.
                ati.cchtml.com is a suitable place for recording issues, capturing sufficient system information and reproducibility information provides useful information. We are aware of each bug that goes onto ati.cchtml.com, but obviously we don't generally respond or provide guidance on any timeline or priority for fixes.

                Regards,

                Matthew

                Comment


                • #53
                  What good does it do?

                  I have visited this site to report bugs and have watched many of them go unnoticed for a long time. I currently own a Radeon 3850 and it works great, in Windows. In Linux it may as well be an IGP. I use Linux everyday and have been for the past two years. I haven't had a stable release of fglrx on my system yet. Atleast not what I would ever deem stable. Something is ALWAYS broken. I'm not even asking for much. I just want simple 3D acceleration. I don't play games. I would just like to be able to have simple compositing desktop effects, smooth playing video, and no glitches that cause my system to lock up. And, yes I know it's fglrx locking my system up because if I don't use it everything works fine. I'm like everyone else, I'm tired of hearing excuses for stuff not working. I have a media center with an Nvidia card in it and it works almost flawlessly. No random screen glitches, no random lock ups or duplicating windows. I'm so tired of hearing the excuses that my next purchase probably will not be an AMD video card.

                  Report bugs you say? Where do you want me to start? I could go add five right now with the newly released 9.7 driver and I've only been using it for 2 hours.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by skywarp04 View Post
                    I have visited this site to report bugs and have watched many of them go unnoticed for a long time.
                    When you say "this site" do you mean Phoronix or the bug tracker ? Reporting a bug here won't get it in front of the developers.

                    Originally posted by skywarp04 View Post
                    Report bugs you say? Where do you want me to start? I could go add five right now with the newly released 9.7 driver and I've only been using it for 2 hours.
                    As long as you are not reporting bugs which are already in the system, please go ahead. If the bugs have already been entered and have not already been closed, please add your information to the existing tickets. If the bug description that matches your symptoms is generic ("black screen", "doesn't work", "sucks" etc..) then compare the steps to reproduce with yours and start a new ticket if it seems likely to be a completely different problem.

                    You may find that the open drivers plus a compositor like Metacity or KWin using XRender already meet your needs. Those compositors use the 3D engine but do not require hardware accelerated OpenGL.
                    Last edited by bridgman; 07-24-2009, 12:42 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                      With the specific exception of 3D apps requiring high levels of GL support, I believe all of the GPUs and usage scenarios were already supported as well as or better than fglrx before the parts were dropped from fglrx. For 3D-intensive users we recommended that they stay with their existing distro release until the open source driver framework catches up with their needs.

                      If you see any other cases where products or usage scenarios are not supported by the open drivers, please let us know. Analog tv outputs are still causing trouble, but AFAIK everything else is supported.
                      That is exactly the problem. You are stopping Linux development process by your action of not supporting newer Linux distributions until open source driver "catch up".
                      If I used to use minimal 3D abilities (enough for my usage) then if I install newer linux distribution, my card is unsupported there, because AMD says so.
                      Why don`t you make SHURE that OpenSource driver "catches up" right away, in all areas, including 3D? Maybe some features never worked actually?
                      when you drop support for an product, one and a half year after user was buying it?
                      Also what will we do with things that didn`t even work quite well
                      from the moment of start selling Integrated GPU in chipset
                      till the moment you "drop" users of AMD platform (Like HDMI and SVHS TV-Out on my integrated AMD motherboard)
                      You are basically saying, some product features of integrated
                      AMD graphics will NEVER be used by AMD drivers in its lifetime?

                      Wouldn`t there be nice to users of Chipset-integrated AMD graphics to STAY supported but with already available fglrx version (not newer than latest "supported" fglrx for that hardware) but continue to MAINTAIN IT
                      so user can happily continue to use older version where you freezed support for, in newer Linux distributions (Maybe even only Newer LongTermSupport distro versions).

                      And, to answer your conclusion from the start of the conversation:
                      I AM extrapolating level of suport for future AMD graphic products, by level of support that I would recieve in the lifetime of IGP AMD products we are using right now.
                      And we concluded that AMD will mostly support its integrated graphics for 1,5 to 2 years (from inception) and it will drop it.
                      Therefore, there are fat chances that I will push my customers to use AMD integrated graphics on large deployments (including Notebook AMD platforms, that is the same integrated problem).

                      Only way we as users could say we are granted for our choice of AMD products is that you continue to maintain _current latest version of driver_ for particular product in a manner that ensure that long-time users recieve proper support for Newer LTS linux distributions
                      OR make _Shure_ with your contribution that user`s experience will not go away with open source drivers, in the MOMENT you stop developing driver for a IGP/older card.
                      And for god`s sake, develop fully working drivers BEFORE card is realeased to the public in the first place.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by doubledr View Post
                        Agree. IMO, this is a fraud, seriously.

                        Please clearly indicate the range of the support kernels.
                        Yes this in insane. It should be known what versions are supported And working on then flawlessly and what are not.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Markore View Post
                          Yes this in insane. It should be known what versions are supported And working on then flawlessly and what are not.
                          As has been communicated previously in this thread, we "support" distributions, not kernels. A kernel version is mostly meaningless since it represents the base code. It does not indicate which patches have been applied and neither does it represent which config options are present.

                          If we were explicit about which kernel versions were supported, we would then need to go the next level and determine which config options are supported and nto supported.

                          Your comment above above "flawlessly" is what is causing the delay. There have been some changes that have caused issues that have taken a lot longer to resolve - and some are still pending.

                          Historically we have caught up with kernels a release or two after the upstream has released. This maps to our standard development cycle - there is about a 6-8 weeks between when we close development and when the driver is released.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Markore View Post
                            That is exactly the problem. You are stopping Linux development process by your action of not supporting newer Linux distributions until open source driver "catch up". If I used to use minimal 3D abilities (enough for my usage) then if I install newer linux distribution, my card is unsupported there, because AMD says so.
                            The open source drivers already have more than "minimal 3D abilities" on all of the affected GPUs. What specific 3D functionality do you consider "minimal" but not available in the open drivers today ?

                            Originally posted by Markore View Post
                            Why don`t you make SHURE that OpenSource driver "catches up" right away, in all areas, including 3D? Maybe some features never worked actually? when you drop support for an product, one and a half year after user was buying it? Also what will we do with things that didn`t even work quite well from the moment of start selling Integrated GPU in chipset till the moment you "drop" users of AMD platform (Like HDMI and SVHS TV-Out on my integrated AMD motherboard. You are basically saying, some product features of integrated AMD graphics will NEVER be used by AMD drivers in its lifetime?
                            If you mean "some product features on older hardware... will never be used by AMD-supplied drivers on Linux, only on Windows" that is certainly possible, although I expect we should be able to figure out the examples you listed.

                            Originally posted by Markore View Post
                            Wouldn`t there be nice to users of Chipset-integrated AMD graphics to STAY supported but with already available fglrx version (not newer than latest "supported" fglrx for that hardware) but continue to MAINTAIN IT so user can happily continue to use older version where you freezed support for, in newer Linux distributions (Maybe even only Newer LongTermSupport distro versions).
                            If we weren't supporting open source graphics development as well it's possible we could do that. I don't think we can do both, and open source drivers will give you longer support and more features over time than legacy closed drivers.

                            Originally posted by Markore View Post
                            And, to answer your conclusion from the start of the conversation: I AM extrapolating level of suport for future AMD graphic products, by level of support that I would recieve in the lifetime of IGP AMD products we are using right now. And we concluded that AMD will mostly support its integrated graphics for 1,5 to 2 years (from inception) and it will drop it. Therefore, there are fat chances that I will push my customers to use AMD integrated graphics on large deployments (including Notebook AMD platforms, that is the same integrated problem).
                            That's fair, but then please don't cherry-pick the data. Make sure you include the Xpress 200 (RS4xx) as well, which was launched in 2004 and was also supported right up until 2009. You need to understand that product can stay in the retail supply chain for many years, and there *are* going to be products which get EOL'ed while they are still on a store shelf. I can walk into a local computer store and buy cards based on GPUs we introduced in the late 90s, with no indication that they are anything but the current state of the art. One of the benefits of supporting open source development is that thos products can stay supported long after any vendor would have dropped proprietary driver support for them.

                            Originally posted by Markore View Post
                            Only way we as users could say we are granted for our choice of AMD products is that you continue to maintain _current latest version of driver_ for particular product in a manner that ensure that long-time users recieve proper support for Newer LTS linux distributions OR make _Shure_ with your contribution that user`s experience will not go away with open source drivers, in the MOMENT you stop developing driver for a IGP/older card. And for god`s sake, develop fully working drivers BEFORE card is realeased to the public in the first place.
                            As far as I know the 9.3 drivers work fine on the newest LTS (8.04, right ?). For the last 18 months or so we have been offering Linux support for new GPUs at the same time as other OSes.
                            Last edited by bridgman; 07-25-2009, 11:54 AM.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X