Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

An Updated ATI Kernel Mode-Setting Driver

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

  • An Updated ATI Kernel Mode-Setting Driver

    Phoronix: An Updated ATI Kernel Mode-Setting Driver

    The Linux 2.6.31 kernel will be released within the next month or so and one of the new features in this release is the long-awaited integration of the TTM memory manager and then appearing as a staging driver in this kernel is an ATI kernel mode-setting driver. This KMS driver doesn't yet support the newer R600/R700 GPUs, but it does support the R500 series and will be used by default in the forthcoming release of Fedora 12. While the Linux 2.6.31-rc5 kernel should be released at any point now and the development is quickly winding down on this kernel, David Airlie is trying to push in a significant ATI KMS driver update into this kernel...

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

  • #2
    Getting funnier by the second

    LOL...news to alert me that in a month (or so) my card still won't be supported

    Comment


    • #3
      When will the KMS for R600 supported? please?

      Comment


      • #4
        1. Is Mesa 7.6 needed for GEM/DRI2/KMS for R1xx-R5xx?
        2. Is there a rough schedule for the Mesa 7.6 release?
        3. Is there a chance to include R6xx/R/xx stuff in time for Linux 2.6.32?

        Thanks.

        And thanks to the developers!

        Comment


        • #5
          well i don't see any problems against pulling these updates into mainline.

          after all ati kms is in staging - which means it's experimental code. there should be no problems with pulling those updates, since only those users who know what they are doing will use these drivers.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by yoshi314 View Post
            well i don't see any problems against pulling these updates into mainline.

            after all ati kms is in staging - which means it's experimental code. there should be no problems with pulling those updates, since only those users who know what they are doing will use these drivers.
            It depends if other Kernel parts have to be modified, but it seems it's only radeon related:

            http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/7/29/41

            Comment


            • #7
              When KMS is stable, how much work will it likely take to make a root-less X server?

              1 month? 3 months? 6 months? 12 months?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Louise View Post
                When KMS is stable, how much work will it likely take to make a root-less X server?

                1 month? 3 months? 6 months? 12 months?
                Last time I tried KMS, it was already almost stable. So, with theses patchs, I guess this should be stable enough to be used by users who know what they are doing
                Also, it should be available in the 2.6.32 that should be out within 3 months.

                Concerning root-less X server, my bet that it is already stable but not in good-enough shape to enter the X-server mainline

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by MPF View Post
                  Last time I tried KMS, it was already almost stable. So, with theses patchs, I guess this should be stable enough to be used by users who know what they are doing
                  Can KMS be used together with the Catalyst drivers?

                  Originally posted by MPF View Post
                  Concerning root-less X server, my bet that it is already stable but not in good-enough shape to enter the X-server mainline
                  So it doesn't require a major rewrite of X to make it root-less?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    hi, my first post, uuh exciting ;-)

                    and a stupid question of course...

                    its explicitly said that support for r500 cards is provided...
                    what about r300? does it include that chipset and previous ones?

                    great job
                    thx

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by jakubo View Post
                      its explicitly said that support for r500 cards is provided...
                      what about r300? does it include that chipset and previous ones?
                      Yes. R500 is just the latest that haven't got KMS yet.

                      Check out

                      http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Yes, KMS and GEM/TTM in the radeon/drm/mesa drivers currently supports from R1xx through R5xx, plus RS690 I believe. Not sure about RS600.

                        The Catalyst drivers do not work with the KMS drm; the issue is not so much KMS as the memory manager API; the proprietary drivers use a different (proprietary ) kernel memory manager.

                        AFAIK the primary reason X needed root privileges was that the X drivers accessed hardware directly. Once that stops (KMS moves the hardware accesses into the kernel) then in principle you don't need root privileges for X any more. There are probably a few other things that need to be tweaked but airlied first ran non-root X over a year ago with early KMS.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Louise View Post
                          Can KMS be used together with the Catalyst drivers?
                          When I first saw your question, I wanted to answer a big NO!
                          Then, I would have answered "it is possible in the future using radeon.ko" and so, catalyst would have switched to TTM and would have used radeon.ko for modesetting. But I don't really know if the main difficulty is in the kernel or in the driver :s
                          Finally, I remembered that catalyst had its own kernel stack with its own memory manager. So, they will have to do everything twice. I don't think this will happen in a near future (unless they've been working on it for months already).

                          Originally posted by Louise View Post
                          So it doesn't require a major rewrite of X to make it root-less?
                          Michael made an article about it 2 months ago, I haven't checked the status yet.
                          http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...item&px=NzM2MA
                          If you find any news on it, please let me know
                          Last edited by MPF; 07-29-2009, 12:18 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                            AFAIK the primary reason X needed root privileges was that the X drivers accessed hardware directly. Once that stops (KMS moves the hardware accesses into the kernel) then in principle you don't need root privileges for X any more. There are probably a few other things that need to be tweaked but airlied first ran non-root X over a year ago with early KMS.
                            Cool! It is interesting when just a few key components gets implemented, tons of features comes along.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by MPF View Post
                              When I first saw your question, I wanted to answer a big NO!
                              Then, I would have answered "it is possible in the future to see it", because the biggest problem of catalyst over KMS would have been the simple fact that it would not have used it.
                              Finally, I remembered that catalyst had its own kernel stack with its own memory manager. So, they will have to do everything twice. I don't think this will happen in a near future (unless they've been working on it for months already).
                              Very iffy but got the impression some peeps are actually trying to figure out a solution to that.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X