Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Sandy/Ivy Bridge Gallium3D Driver Merged

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

  • Intel Sandy/Ivy Bridge Gallium3D Driver Merged

    Phoronix: Intel Sandy/Ivy Bridge Gallium3D Driver Merged

    The modern Gallium3D graphics driver for supporting Intel Sandy Bridge "Gen6" and Ivy Bridge "Gen7" graphics has been merged into mainline Mesa!..

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTM1OTc

  • #2
    Intel should use Gallium, there is simply no excuse not using it, except NIH. Even rewriting it from scratch is time worthy! It would steamline the Kernel and Xorg.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by brosis View Post
      Intel should use Gallium, there is simply no excuse not using it, except NIH
      ..and it would help their competitors if Intel used its massive resources on optimizing Gallium3D infrastructure....

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by DanL View Post
        ..and it would help their competitors if Intel used its massive resources on optimizing Gallium3D infrastructure....
        That would help Intel, not so competitiors. "Competitors" introduced Gallium first, mind you. Given limited manpower, it is stupid to build walled gardens in graphics stack. This is definately the most negative point about Intel drivers.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by brosis View Post
          Intel should use Gallium, there is simply no excuse not using it, except NIH. Even rewriting it from scratch is time worthy! It would steamline the Kernel and Xorg.
          Its not a matter of NIH, the devs have said many times that the only reason they didn't move to Gallium was because they had spent so much time optimizing the classic driver already that they didnt want all that work to be for nothing. They were very happy with the classic driver they had written and decided to stick with it

          Comment


          • #6
            Looking at their reactions, they're really annoyed by this "toy" driver, and did all they could to shoot it down. We'll see where it goes from there, but certainly Intel looks more interested in their competitive advantage than benefiting the entire Linux ecosystem.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by DanL View Post
              ..and it would help their competitors if Intel used its massive resources on optimizing Gallium3D infrastructure....
              They're already helping their competitors with their work on mesa, X, and wayland.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by brosis View Post
                Intel should use Gallium, there is simply no excuse not using it, except NIH. Even rewriting it from scratch is time worthy! It would steamline the Kernel and Xorg.
                How many 3D drivers have you written?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Now that Mesa has merged the Gallium driver for Intel hardware into mainline, what does this mean for distributions?

                  Will users of Intel graphics hardware now use the Gallium3D drivers by default, or will the classic DRI driver still serve as the defaultdriver? Also, if both the Gallium3D and classic DRI drivers are now in mainline, will there be an easy option for users to switch 'on the fly' between Gallium and DRI, either via a text command (like, modprobe -r <intel DRI driver> and modprobe <intel Gallium3D driver>) or a graphical interface?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Sonadow View Post
                    Now that Mesa has merged the Gallium driver for Intel hardware into mainline, what does this mean for distributions?
                    Gallium driver for Sandy/Ivy do not bring anything more than classic driver. Nor it provide performance gains.

                    Distros will stick to classic Intel driver.


                    GPU driver devs/enthusiasts will be able to play with ilo more easily. That is just it.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Sonadow View Post
                      Now that Mesa has merged the Gallium driver for Intel hardware into mainline, what does this mean for distributions?

                      Will users of Intel graphics hardware now use the Gallium3D drivers by default, or will the classic DRI driver still serve as the defaultdriver? Also, if both the Gallium3D and classic DRI drivers are now in mainline, will there be an easy option for users to switch 'on the fly' between Gallium and DRI, either via a text command (like, modprobe -r <intel DRI driver> and modprobe <intel Gallium3D driver>) or a graphical interface?
                      ln -s /usr/lib/dri/ilo_dri.so /usr/lib/dri/i965_dri.so
                      glxinfo |grep OpenGL
                      ATTENTION: default value of option vblank_mode overridden by environment.
                      ATTENTION: default value of option vblank_mode overridden by environment.
                      OpenGL vendor string: LunarG, Inc.
                      OpenGL renderer string: Gallium 0.4 on Intel(R) Sandybridge Desktop
                      OpenGL version string: 2.1 Mesa 9.2.0
                      OpenGL shading language version string: 1.30

                      ln -sf /usr/lib/dri/i965c_dri.so /usr/lib/dri/i965_dri.so
                      glxinfo |grep OpenGL
                      ATTENTION: default value of option vblank_mode overridden by environment.
                      ATTENTION: default value of option vblank_mode overridden by environment.
                      OpenGL vendor string: Intel Open Source Technology Center
                      OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI Intel(R) Sandybridge Desktop x86/MMX/SSE2
                      OpenGL core profile version string: 3.1 (Core Profile) Mesa 9.2.0
                      OpenGL core profile shading language version string: 1.40
                      OpenGL core profile context flags: (none)
                      OpenGL core profile extensions:
                      OpenGL version string: 3.0 Mesa 9.2.0
                      OpenGL shading language version string: 1.30
                      OpenGL context flags: (none)
                      OpenGL extensions:

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by brosis View Post
                        Intel should use Gallium, there is simply no excuse not using it, except NIH. Even rewriting it from scratch is time worthy! It would steamline the Kernel and Xorg.
                        Gallium is MIT while the earlier drivers were BSD\GPL mix. It's possible there are GPLed contributions in the older drivers they can't port under the new license.

                        Unlikely, but possible...

                        Besides, what if they want to FOSS a given solution but not to allow other companies to improve upon it without sharing ? The GPL forces the players to play nice. And while Intel doesn't want to play nice all the time, they sure want the other companies to play by the rules

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Pontostroy View Post
                          ln -s /usr/lib/dri/ilo_dri.so /usr/lib/dri/i965_dri.so
                          glxinfo |grep OpenGL
                          ATTENTION: default value of option vblank_mode overridden by environment.
                          ATTENTION: default value of option vblank_mode overridden by environment.
                          OpenGL vendor string: LunarG, Inc.
                          OpenGL renderer string: Gallium 0.4 on Intel(R) Sandybridge Desktop
                          OpenGL version string: 2.1 Mesa 9.2.0
                          OpenGL shading language version string: 1.30

                          ln -sf /usr/lib/dri/i965c_dri.so /usr/lib/dri/i965_dri.so
                          glxinfo |grep OpenGL
                          ATTENTION: default value of option vblank_mode overridden by environment.
                          ATTENTION: default value of option vblank_mode overridden by environment.
                          OpenGL vendor string: Intel Open Source Technology Center
                          OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI Intel(R) Sandybridge Desktop x86/MMX/SSE2
                          OpenGL core profile version string: 3.1 (Core Profile) Mesa 9.2.0
                          OpenGL core profile shading language version string: 1.40
                          OpenGL core profile context flags: (none)
                          OpenGL core profile extensions:
                          OpenGL version string: 3.0 Mesa 9.2.0
                          OpenGL shading language version string: 1.30
                          OpenGL context flags: (none)
                          OpenGL extensions:
                          Instead of re-linking the files, you can also do the following in your xorg.conf (from Chris Wilson on the mesa-dev list):
                          Section "Device"
                          Identifier "Device0"
                          Driver "Intel"
                          Option "DRI" "ilo"
                          EndSection

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by c117152 View Post
                            Gallium is MIT while the earlier drivers were BSD\GPL mix. It's possible there are GPLed contributions in the older drivers they can't port under the new license.
                            I don't know where you heard that, but the classic i965 Mesa driver is entirely under the MIT license---the exact same license used by the rest of the project. Our driver contains no GPL code whatsoever.
                            Free Software Developer .:. Mesa and Xorg
                            Opinions expressed in these forum posts are my own.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by DanL View Post
                              ..and it would help their competitors if Intel used its massive resources on optimizing Gallium3D infrastructure....
                              Intel's GPUs don't compete anyways, the silicon just doesn't have the performance. The idea of not doing it is moronic and comes from management that doesn't understand the basis of technology, that Intel is a HARDWARE company, not making sure every aspect of your hardware does exactly what it is capable of doing due to your bullshitting on drivers is only detrimental to your sales.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X