Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Radeon Evergreen HDMI Audio Code Is Still M.I.A.

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by DaemonFC View Post
    Answer to what is causing almost anything on your Radeon to not work right in Linux.



    They're so far up Microsoft's ass it's hard to tell where Microsoft stops and AMD begins. But that's true for almost any component manufacturer for x86 PCs.
    uhhhhh aaaaa thats a ugly virus... my flatscreen now has a crack from the picture ....

    Comment


    • #17
      Lets face it, this should be the most compeling reason for AMD to get their act together in respect to the OS driver. Right now they have a pretty good advantage in the Android department exacly because their open driver is in better shappe than the pitfull Imagination liced Intel chipset. We all know this could change quickly, as Intel could incorporate a ULV version of their rapidly improving SB/IB/Haswell graphics chipset and leverage their OS driver or simply buy Imagination and do whatever they want with the drivers.

      In a nutshell, like many times before, AMD has an advatage in one of the fastest growing market (Android tablets, and netbooks) and will loose simply because it cannot focus its efforts.

      Look at the radeon/fglrx state. They have two half-backed, semi-useless drivers. The OS driver is by far the best to 2D desktop, video accelaration (even without uvd) but is useless in the mobile department because it can't manage power and useless in the desktop department because it can't accelarate 3D well enough. Fglrx is pretty much useless for 2D desktop, but is a must if you want to use some anything which runs on battery or 3D graphics. In this sense, we have the good 3D/power driver which ends beeing used in noteboks, on which 3D is not really the focus of the platform and the good 2D/video driver which can onlybe used in the desktop where what we really need 3D performance.

      I really hope someone at the high ranks sees that they could levarage the OS driver to enter Android market IF they can get AT LEAST the power issue corrected. Or just dump the OS driver and make a good closed driver. Either way, the consumer will be better served.

      Comment


      • #18
        Almost all ASICs these days are made up of multiple bits of IP.

        Originally posted by allquixotic View Post
        The legal reviews would probably be a lot less painful if the only thing to avoid would be giving out hardware-specific information about AMD proprietary IP. As it stands, DRM and IP and patents owned by other companies are littered all throughout AMD's ASICs. So it's like a legal minefield, and AMD's lawyers have to navigate through it.
        What AMD is free to reveal will vary wi every bit of IP that the integrate into the chip. It isn't just a DRM issue as many so want to believe. This is not to say DRM isn't part of the problem it is just that every bit of IP comes with a contract detailing what AMD can do with it.

        Frankly this is not as big of an issue as it might be with say an ARM based SoC where almost everything on the chip is IP that the vendor doesn't own.
        I wish a company could make a competitive 3d chipset that isn't patent-encumbered; doesn't contain IP licensed from other companies; and contains no DRM. And on top of that the company is open-source friendly. They would probably release enough information to make a fully functional driver for all components of the hardware in these circumstances, and just hide enough information so their competitors couldn't (easily) use information in the driver to create better hardware that outpaces the company that released the driver (as that would be counterproductive).
        OK but then who would buy such a chip? Seriously, people want to play videos on their machines these days and that requires supporting DRM and most likely the purchase of external IP.

        More importantly IP isn't a bad thing in and of itself. IP is a bad thing if the contracts governing that IP are to restrictive. That is not however the case for all IP. IP can be very useful for system designers because it can allow them to put together systems quickly with a high degree of confidence. Think of IP as a modern day TTL circuit, the only difference being that you put them "together" in a CAD system instead of a circuit board.

        In the end IP is no more bad than any other technical marvel. You just need to have access to it if you are doing systems programming.
        And yes, that does mean I'd be willing to live without hardware video encoding/decoding by the chipset, in particular all the MPEG crap standards. I do want WebM and Theora in hardware, but the CPU in my box is plenty powerful for decoding 1080p in virtually any format, proprietary or no. I just don't see what value video encoding/decoding brings, when you can easily do so in hardware using shaders, or entirely in software (and in both those cases, people who do want to use proprietary codecs can purchase legally licensed software implementations of them, or hardware-based implementations that run as a shader, which is still software).
        The problem is how does a company market such a beast? Again what you need or want here doesn't reflect what the majority of the people want. I'm not sure why you believe MPEG is such a problem either but that is another discussion.

        On top of all of this there is very good reason to support hardware video decode. One reason is that it saves a lot of power. For many an energy sipping decoder is more important than 3D acceleration. As to software based decodes there is a real issue of power, but software also requires memory and processor time thus is a big negative for many.

        I also think that said company should refuse to implement any display/audio standards that require DRM, and refuse to implement the DRM component if it's optional. This will send a strong message to the media cartels that their encumbered technology is not wanted.
        Give me a break, the media companies have no choice in this matter and you know it! I have no problem witha DRM free chip but also realize it would fail in the market. The thing is people want to be able to view their latest movies on their computers, as such will buy hardware that supports such activities. The media companies will rightfully demand DRM systems as that is the only thing they have to prevent thefts. Please don't try to convince me thefts wouldn't be a problem.
        Since AMD is the underdog (they only control ~27% of the desktop graphics market from the recent Steam hardware survey, and even less of the CPU market), you'd think they'd be the company to take on this kind of liberal strategy, to differentiate themselves from Big Green and Big Blue who tend to out-pace them at every turn, both in terms of sales and top-end performance. But AMD only has one foot in the freedom pool; the other foot is standing on proprietary quicksand, which is quickly pulling the entire company down.
        OK Steam is a gamers oriented survey. That should tell you something about biases right there. Besides that AMD has been ahead in GPU performance for some time now so you are really out of touch.

        In any event you are looking at this from the wrong standpoint, AMD is in the freedom pool as you put it, but has to work with in real constraints. Just like any other company that does business in the US has to obey the law and the agreements they have with other companies. Instead of filling this forum with all your negativity you really need to look at the positive aspects of AMDs push here. They did a 180 a few years ago with respect to open support and frankly everyone should be happy about that. When it comes right down to it AMD opened up ATI so I really don't know why you are whining so here.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by wizard69 View Post
          OK but then who would buy such a chip? Seriously, people want to play videos on their machines these days and that requires supporting DRM and most likely the purchase of external IP.
          you have no drm problem if you put 100% on illegal sources.

          Therefore it is legitimate to be a pirate.

          to be a pirate is the only true solution.

          Comment


          • #20
            Yeah being a thief is so socially acceptable.

            Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
            you have no drm problem if you put 100% on illegal sources.

            Therefore it is legitimate to be a pirate.

            to be a pirate is the only true solution.
            You might as well join the occupy movement. Your reasoning seems to be in sync with those guys.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by wizard69 View Post
              You might as well join the occupy movement. Your reasoning seems to be in sync with those guys.
              no I'm a Pirate.

              Comment


              • #22
                I've seen a lot of unfortunate use of the industry propaganda term "IP" in here, which stands for Intellectual Property. It's an umbrella term designed to confuse people about several different and not always similar laws.

                It would be nicer for propagandists like Alex Deucher and John Bridgman to unmuddle the situation and use the words copyright or patented when appropriate, and to come out and admit they're not allowed to tell us how some parts of their hardware work due to contracts that AMD willfully entered into with Microsoft and Apple.

                They're not struggling to help open source, if they were they wouldn't have kissed Microsoft's ass in those damned dirty backroom DRM deals.

                Don't piss on us and say it's raining please. As for the reverse engineered HDMI audio support from Rafał Miłecki, thank you so much. If we had to rely on AMD sitting there with their thumbs up their asses over back alley Microsoft deals they don't want to take the blame for, then something tells me nobody using a Radeon would have HDMI audio support for a very long time if ever.

                It'd be nice if someone from AMD could also explain why their hardware is so badly designed that HDMI audio itself has been intertwined with the DRM called HDCP.

                I would venture a guess that the two really have nothing to do with one another and we're getting more lies from AMD because their masters in organized crime don't want HDMI audio there at all because it brings the open source community a step closer to being able to easily watch Blu Ray movies.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by DaemonFC View Post
                  I've seen a lot of unfortunate use of the industry propaganda term "IP" in here, which stands for Intellectual Property. It's an umbrella term designed to confuse people about several different and not always similar laws.
                  It's also a convenient term to cover a half dozen different issues (some related to standards licensing, some related to trade secrets, all involving copyright in some form). In cases where I can't go into details, what umbrella term would you recommend ?

                  Originally posted by DaemonFC View Post
                  It would be nicer for propagandists like Alex Deucher and John Bridgman to unmuddle the situation and use the words copyright or patented when appropriate
                  See above. The whole point is that I can't go into details while the issues are being worked out. This shouldn't be a surprise.

                  Originally posted by DaemonFC View Post
                  and to come out and admit they're not allowed to tell us how some parts of their hardware work due to contracts that AMD and the rest of the PC industry willfully entered into with Microsoft and Apple and a number of other groups in order to be able to participate in the largest parts of the PC market.
                  Fixed that for you.

                  Not sure what your point is here. We've been saying this since we started the open source project. We've also been saying that it's not obvious where the exact line is between what we can and can't tell you about, and that in some cases it's an expensive and time-consuming process to figure it out for each different area. We focused on core things first like 3D acceleration but even that took a couple of years and significant effort from a lot of people internally.

                  Originally posted by DaemonFC View Post
                  They're not struggling to help open source, if they were they wouldn't have kissed Microsoft's ass in those damned dirty backroom DRM deals.
                  You mean "we would make hardware that could only be sold in 1-2% of the PC market" ? Seriously, I don't know why you feel compelled to blame us for everything in the PC industry and make sneaky suggestions that somehow "it's just us".

                  When you're ready to talk about serious proposals that would not drastically reduce our GPU business let me know.

                  Originally posted by DaemonFC View Post
                  It'd be nice if someone from AMD could also explain why their hardware is so badly designed that HDMI audio itself has been intertwined with the DRM called HDCP.

                  I would venture a guess that the two really have nothing to do with one another and we're getting more lies from AMD because their masters in organized crime don't want HDMI audio there at all because it brings the open source community a step closer to being able to easily watch Blu Ray movies.
                  HDCP is only one part of it. I wish it were that simple.

                  Not sure where your "badly designed" thinking is coming from. Integrating blocks makes the chip smaller, and lets us give you more performance and features for the same $$. If you call that bad design I don't know how to respond. Integrating blocks also has a downside in terms of making it more difficult to support with open source drivers; the challenge is finding the right balance.
                  Last edited by bridgman; 12-05-2011, 11:43 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    @DaemonFC

                    Wow man, no need to be so hostile. If I had to guess why HDMI audio is encumbered with DRM in the hardware, I'd say that it's because the development on these GPUs began several years before ATI/AMD decided they wanted to support open-source drivers. Thus they took the easiest/default route with integrating various bits of hardware IP and this is how it ended up. It's not 'badly designed' - in my experience the hardware works rather beautifully well in the environment for which it was intended. Neither does it mean they aren't doing the best they can with regards to open-source on the hardware that actually exists right now. They are.

                    Also, AMD's people have said several times that since open-source is now an active target, the newer generations of hardware will have taken these issues into account and this sort of problem should happen less. For example, newer generations of UVD should be accessible to open drivers, just the way Intel's decoding hardware is.

                    I don't understand why you are complaining about AMD entering into DRM agreements, either, unless it is just a foil to 'justify' you shouting at people. It is as simple as this: graphics hardware needs to be DRM-compliant or it won't sell. The idea of them changing this just to work better for open-source customers is, due to market realities, sort've laughable. Some of your other posts paint you as rather a Conservative, so this should be something you understand.

                    Also, FWIW, your conspiracy theories make you sound slightly crazy.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                      You mean "we would make hardware that could only be sold in 1-2% of the PC market" ? Seriously, I don't know why you feel compelled to blame us for everything in the PC industry and make sneaky suggestions that somehow "it's just us".
                      I'm sure amd can make profit in making hardware for 1-2% of the most computer addicted people on earth.

                      thats the REAL point!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        AMD makes a mistake by tying itself too much to the Microsoft Windows platform. Big mistake! If they want to a piece of the growing tablet and mobile market they should forget about Windows. Nobody wants Windows on their phone, tablet or other mobile device!



                        AMD should focus on getting good Linux/Android support for their hardware, this is the future for tablets not Windows.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          If something depends on DRM, I'd rather not have that thing, period. At least not until the DRM is reliably broken and I am guaranteed the ability to use what I bought on the device of my choice and at the time and place I choose to.

                          If there were really so many details to getting HDMI audio to work, it wouldn't be relatively well working through reverse engineering. They need to be honest that the reason for a few people booting up with blank screens due to the reverse engineered code that is "not always right" is because of their organized crime bosses at Apple, Microsoft, and Hollywood. Even though Bridgman tries to be apologists by making it sound like the DRM plague isn't all the fault of the aforementioned companies and the companies that work with them (mostly AMD, Nvidia, and Intel), they're probably more than 95% of the problem between just the ones I've mentioned.

                          Don't worry, the criminals buy laws to make you the criminal for foiling their plot and working around the limitations they've put into their products. I wonder when AMD plans to obfuscate HDMI audio further so that it can't be made to work at all. Probably whenever Hollywood and Microsoft and Apple tell them to.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                            I'm sure amd can make profit in making hardware for 1-2% of the most computer addicted people on earth.

                            thats the REAL point!
                            They work with the "industry" (really Apple and Microsoft and Hollywood) to screw over their users and claim "everyone" (being AMD, Intel, and Nvidia all do it) as if that justifies their dishonest business practices.

                            Collaborators with all kinds of criminals throughout history have used similar excuses and it didn't fly then either.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Worth noting. When you use the words "everyone" and "industry" to talk about a grand total of 5 or 6 companies, it means that there would be antitrust issues investigated if our government wasn't bought by these companies to begin with.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                                I'm sure amd can make profit in making hardware for 1-2% of the most computer addicted people on earth.

                                thats the REAL point!
                                1-2% of a market where many are just as much "free as in beer" as "free as in freedom", on a platform that has no high-end games to speak of and that will lack many features simply because it's not within AMDs power to deliver them legally so people will continue to whine and not buy it. Your point has no basis in reality....

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X