Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The State Of Open-Source Radeon Driver Features

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

  • Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
    Money is not an instrument to provide innovation and commonwealth of the society. Money is any object or record that is generally accepted as payment for goods and services and repayment of debts in a given socio-economic context or country. The main functions of money are distinguished as: a medium of exchange; a unit of account; a store of value; and, occasionally in the past, a standard of deferred payment.
    And how are the two arguments there really that distinct? Do you actually understand the quote you posted, or are you just doing the tried and true and yet still patently ridiculous "dictionary" argument?

    Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
    A company's purpose is to maximize the shareholders' wealth. Right now AMD already has a driver called fglrx. Probably it's core is shared between linux and windows and only provides a wrapper for some generic functions that are implemented differently on windows and linux. For some people (maybe a lot I don't know I'm not one of them) the fglrx has problems. So AMD should focus on solving those problems. Not rewriting from scratch and open source driver. I understand that an open source driver would be better from Stallman's view but remember (1). Reimplementing that driver in open source is probably a gargantuan task. You may say that why don't they open source their current fglrx driver. Maybe because they have a lot of code that isn't theirs and can't open source it.
    Again, you are under the belief that the two projects are taking resource from each other. Seriously, the cost of free drivers to AMD is about four guys and the occasional cost of a legal review. I think even our tiny fractured market share has more than made up for that input (something that is also indicated by the fact that they were forced to lay off some of the CPU driver teams, and yet the graphics team was untouched). Meanwhile Catalyst taps into the workloads of thousands - you can not really claim the problem is a lack of resources. Granted, I agree with you that Catalyst does not have as many problems as some claim, but the R600g drivers better suit my use case and yes, I do prefer having a free driver over proprietary. Does that really make me that dogmatic? That I prefer one over the other?

    Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
    New drivers for new devices should start as open source but right now some drivers are proprietary and we should accept that. They won't become open source. So, in order to attract a larger userbase, we must present compelling arguments for them to move to linux. One compelling argument is that you can have the same graphics performance on both windows and linux. The argument that open source is better but still 50-80% (you're very optimistic this is not what I see in practice) of the performance turns a lot of people off. In fact even though everybody agrees that open source is better in theory, right now they will have the fglrx driver thank you very much. So AMD should focus on providing value to the customer. And most customers don't care if it's open source or not, but care if it's fast or not. And for them it's easier (I think) to fix the fglrx than to rewrite it.
    Yes, they have the Catalyst drivers if they want that for now. So why do you have this huge bee in your bonnet about the very existence of the free drivers? Why the hell do you have this view that people who prefer the free drivers have committed against you personally? As I said, it is not really taking resources away from Catalyst (and Catalyst is not really taking resources from the free drivers) so I really do not get why you are making this argument. It is like saying that I prefer this brand of cereal, but some others prefer this one by the same company, so that other one must be hurting my favourite cereal. And that the existence of that cereal is somehow preventing me from getting more house guests....

    Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
    What about Apple's freedom to do what they want with their products? Who made you god to say on which platforms should Siri be available. Ever thought that they did it only for Apple because of limited resources allocated for that project? Why should they have made it available for other platforms if it didn't guarantee revenue?
    And who exactly stopped Apple from doing that? Okay, people criticized them for it. Big deal. Their "freedom" was never infringed, people just complained, as was their right. Tell me why that should also be a problem?

    Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
    In this case, opensourcing the driver will produce vast platform advantage and compatibility of AMD solutions to all current and future systems. Agreed. But only if open source programmers take it and improve it. There is no guarantee that people will work on it. Not everybody is a graphics driver programmer you know. AMD should make something of a survey to find out how many people are actually willing to work on their driver.
    Well, the thing is that we already know that people are working on it. Red Hat has people hired exclusively to work on it. Then of course there is Marek, and other independent contributors. So there are outside non-AMD people working on it (as was already well explored earlier in this thread). So what is your point?

    Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
    Yes clueless people. The kind of clueless people that use windows and don't care about linux but the linux community wants them to take on linux. That kind of people. The potential customers if you wish. They aren't sheep. Do you think Microsoft calls its customers sheep because they can't do kernel programming? And they don't care about open source. They first and foremost care if they can do in linux what they can do in windows equally easier or even easier. And right now, since they don't have the same performance with the radeon driver they will go with the proprietary ones. They may be sheep from your point of view, but I call them normal people for going with the performance. Again, after explaining open source they agree that it's a better development model, but they still choose performance and functionality first. That is why AMD should focus on making sure that fglrx works. And the X.org guys can help the AMD guys by not changing the interface so much so that people could use the end of life driver version indefinitely(talking about the 2000 3000 and 4000 lines that no longer work with the latest X.org).
    Again, work on the one does not negate work on the other. As for the sheep comment, I think it is a bit presumptuous to call crazycheese the Linux community (and trust me, there are plenty of Microsoft fan boys that can be just as inflammatory, insulting, or hard to understand). I also think it is a bit presumptuous for you to be the one here to describe people as "normal" or not. Is this about your little survey again?

    As for X.org, I will admit that it is up for X.org to justify there decisions on those points and not who does not fully grasp the complexities of the situation, but the way I understand it your problem is the fact that the X.org server shipped with most distributions is one that can be considered to be stable branches of something that is under constant development. Well, if you do not like that, then do not use one of those distros - use one that offers long term support and upgrades like a Windows version would. Use something like Ubuntu LTS or CentOS or Debian Stable. That is what most of these binary blob drivers are targeting. Do that and you will still be able to use Catalyst with those cards for years. If the average Windows desktop was as much as a moving target as Fedora or non-LTS Ubuntu release they would hit the shame issues there with proprietary blobs.

    Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
    I feel that the linux community says that they want better market share but aren't actually willing to do what is necessary to get that market share. And when they don't get it they call everybody sheep and narrow minded for not bending to their way of doing things. If the purpose is to get as much market share as possible we should focus on what people want. Not on what Stallman wants.
    Well, that is the thing - should that really be the goal? To get more market share? I personally would much rather focus on building an operating system that works based on solid open foundations and free ideals. I do not really care if everyone uses it as long as it works and suits my use case. I am using your own criteria there BO$$. I will admit that for some people the goal is world domination, but I will take a working free system any day over a popular one that does not suit me needs. If we get more users that is perfectly fine, but it is not something I am personally striving for. I am just striving to make my system work even better. And for me it works best with free software drivers.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
      Were these people insane before coming here, or did phoronix do this to them???
      A bit of both, a bit of both. You do not feel the insanity building in your head just by being here?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
        Were these people insane before coming here, or did phoronix do this to them???
        I was probably insane before I came here... I volunteered to set up and lead the open source effort
        Last edited by bridgman; 01-18-2013, 03:36 PM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Hamish Wilson View Post
          A bit of both, a bit of both. You do not feel the insanity building in your head just by being here?
          I was a reasonable dude before phoronix, handsome, well-regarded... and look at me now

          Something is wrong.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by bridgman View Post
            I was probably insane before I came here... I volunteered to set up and lead the open source effort
            Well... THAT's insane...

            Comment


            • Post docs and code, not excuses!

              Bridgman writes:
              > I was probably insane before I came here...

              The first step is admitting that you need help. And sure enough
              you are getting better:

              > Yeah, we've been thinking of switching to BSD.

              It has been several years now and still power management needs
              significant work, and UVD has no support whatsoever? How many
              generations of hardware have come out in this time? You could
              have easily changed the hardware to make it easy to document
              UVD. And what exactly is the reason for lousy power management?
              Do the power companies have compromising photos of you?

              Releasing docs bought you a lot of goodwill initially, but it has
              been too little too slowly. "It is soooo haaaaarrrrrd!" What,
              are you 3 years old? We customers are tired of the excuses.
              Your window is rapidly closing. Nouveau has video decoding, by
              reverse engineering, and you can't provide it even with insider
              information? And there are *multiple* projects reverse engineering
              other existing chips. And there are *multiple* projects designing
              new chips that will be completely open from day 1.

              If you want sales, I have a suggestion: spend less time posting the
              same excuse 6700 times and more time posting documentation and code.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                I was probably insane before I came here... I volunteered to set up and lead the open source effort
                I am not insane...

                I am insane, when you, sir limit the driver development.

                Ok, I can understand (halfway) why the UVD interface is blocked.. Hollywood makes Linux-based Bluray players, but fails to produce interface so Linux users can buy and watch Bluray. They don't want our money and want us to torrent their films..! Okay.

                I am also *okay* with MESA development rate.

                But presegmenting the driver development as already sub-class, in fact TWO TIMES, this is just not gonna work. This is Ratner Effect. People will not work happily on from-begin sub-class driver that is doomed to loose to FGLRX anyway no matter what. I am totally *not okay* with that.

                You will have to motivate people to use your driver, in order for your opensource strategy to be successful. I totally don't see it...

                Instead, you silently push FGLRX, which always was broken pile of code, you suddenly decided to rewrite, knowing that even in top state it will never be more advantageous than existing nvidia blob(!) So, you use corporate resources to achieve zero advantage(!).. I don't get it..

                Why don't you use opensource driver as base for cross-OS development, prefering in-house solution instead? You are automatically limiting OS support to steam engines. When the resulting driver is underperforming you claim opensource strategy may not work out.

                But when microsoft releases another forced-preinstalled failure to the market, you magically want to support it ASAP holding everything else off. That, in fact, does not surprise me.

                I don't get it. You (AMD) are supposed to seek new markets, expand the marketshare and stimulate the sells. Instead, you offer one sub-class product and a sub-class legacy development as an addition...

                Very well if you spend more money on opensource than anybody, but what about everything above? From consumer standpoint its like demanding people to buy a bad-working product (so marketshare grows) in order to produce drivers for it, which are already told to be crap and suddenly dropping it from priority list or threating to abort because CUSTOMERS are misbehaving.

                I am sure anyone who does this on windows market, Osbornes the windows marketshare in just one year.

                I registered here because of AMD card and I end it after several years because of AMD card.
                Policies like this are not going to work, regardless of which market.

                You gotta LOVE what you do, or it will never show results, unless its that what you expect from the beginning.

                Why am I "insane", well, the higher you expect - the harder you fall, the louder you yell... the longer you remember.
                I am also extremely thankful to all people who contribute to open stack and it was never anything different.

                That said, its my last post on Phoronix, just because there is little point talking to a vendor who is very respositive, yet who's completely not behind it.
                Like in this story (you don't need to know the language to understand the meaning)

                Comment


                • Well, since the rise of ARM, how AMD see porting FGRLX to other platform CPU architectures. Moreover there was a story that VALVE are very excited about open source intel linux driver, and they actually managed to find bug in it. Debugging and seeing what's in the driver allowed them to profile their engine port like no one before.
                  I am sure that if AMD had open source windows driver, there would be no R.A.G.E. fiasco. After all Carmack is not the average graphics programmer. Proprietary drivers are so 90's, and they have no future. Intel got that. AMD will get it, the hard way.
                  Last edited by Drago; 01-18-2013, 06:27 PM. Reason: typo

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                    I am not insane...

                    I am insane, when you, sir limit the driver development.

                    Ok, I can understand (halfway) why the UVD interface is blocked.. Hollywood makes Linux-based Bluray players, but fails to produce interface so Linux users can buy and watch Bluray. They don't want our money and want us to torrent their films..! Okay.

                    I am also *okay* with MESA development rate.

                    But presegmenting the driver development as already sub-class, in fact TWO TIMES, this is just not gonna work. This is Ratner Effect. People will not work happily on from-begin sub-class driver that is doomed to loose to FGLRX anyway no matter what. I am totally *not okay* with that.

                    You will have to motivate people to use your driver, in order for your opensource strategy to be successful. I totally don't see it...

                    Instead, you silently push FGLRX, which always was broken pile of code, you suddenly decided to rewrite, knowing that even in top state it will never be more advantageous than existing nvidia blob(!) So, you use corporate resources to achieve zero advantage(!).. I don't get it..

                    Why don't you use opensource driver as base for cross-OS development, prefering in-house solution instead? You are automatically limiting OS support to steam engines. When the resulting driver is underperforming you claim opensource strategy may not work out.

                    But when microsoft releases another forced-preinstalled failure to the market, you magically want to support it ASAP holding everything else off. That, in fact, does not surprise me.

                    I don't get it. You (AMD) are supposed to seek new markets, expand the marketshare and stimulate the sells. Instead, you offer one sub-class product and a sub-class legacy development as an addition...

                    Very well if you spend more money on opensource than anybody, but what about everything above? From consumer standpoint its like demanding people to buy a bad-working product (so marketshare grows) in order to produce drivers for it, which are already told to be crap and suddenly dropping it from priority list or threating to abort because CUSTOMERS are misbehaving.

                    I am sure anyone who does this on windows market, Osbornes the windows marketshare in just one year.

                    I registered here because of AMD card and I end it after several years because of AMD card.
                    Policies like this are not going to work, regardless of which market.

                    You gotta LOVE what you do, or it will never show results, unless its that what you expect from the beginning.

                    Why am I "insane", well, the higher you expect - the harder you fall, the louder you yell... the longer you remember.
                    I am also extremely thankful to all people who contribute to open stack and it was never anything different.

                    That said, its my last post on Phoronix, just because there is little point talking to a vendor who is very respositive, yet who's completely not behind it.
                    Like in this story (you don't need to know the language to understand the meaning)
                    I've come to the conclusion that it is obvious that Bridgman doesnt like the OSS drivers and he uses the OSS community as an excuse for not liking the drivers. (Which is kind of odd because of his position)

                    So at this point I've pretty much just decided to stop saying anything at all to him and I would suggest you do the same. Anything that we say to him is going to just inflame his opinion even more. Inflaming his opinion would hurt us because of the position that he is in. So really all OSS advocates wopuld be better off to try and stay on his good side. The only way I can see to do that is by not saying anything at all. You know that old saying, if you don't have something nice to say, then just dont say anything.
                    Last edited by duby229; 01-18-2013, 07:01 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                      ... aaaaand this gets back into the question of "what do you mean by better" ? Improved static PM (which is more of a challenge for APUs), or just keep pushing on advanced DPM and hope we can release that ?

                      Right now we're focusing on advanced DPM as a priority but that just means it makes progress, doesn't guarantee it will happen or make it happen "real fast".
                      Well, dynamic PM for the start... it's pretty bad if you can't even use the GPU at full clock! Also, please don't keep on pushing the profile approach as acceptable, it's not. Automatic frequency scaling is a must.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by duby229 View Post
                        I've come to the conclusion that it is obvious that Bridgman doesnt like the OSS drivers and he uses the OSS community as an excuse for not liking the drivers. (Which is kind of odd because of his position)

                        So at this point I've pretty much just decided to stop saying anything at all to him and I would suggest you do the same. Anything that we say to him is going to just inflame his opinion even more. Inflaming his opinion would hurt us because of the position that he is in. So really all OSS advocates wopuld be better off to try and stay on his good side. The only way I can see to do that is by not saying anything at all. You know that old saying, if you don't have something nice to say, then just dont say anything.
                        You both guys just sound like whiny children. Posting manipulative post to try and make Bridgman feel bad in order to booster the open source drivers is no only completely see through but will have no affect what so ever. I understand your frustration but you clearly have no understanding of IT from a corporate viewpoint. If there is one thing I have learn from being a developer for the passed decade it is that its extremely hard to convince management to make changes even when its a very good idea to do so, and changing from a closed development process to an open one is a huge change so I fully understand why things are constantly stalled. Changing a persons mindset is a very difficult thing to do, and when you are dealing with management which typically doesn't always have a technology background yet gets to make all the final decisions changing minds becomes all the more difficult.

                        Personally I'm very grateful that Bridgman is thick skinned enough to take all the flak he gets in his stride, and still provide us with feedback.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by brent View Post
                          Well, dynamic PM for the start... it's pretty bad if you can't even use the GPU at full clock! Also, please don't keep on pushing the profile approach as acceptable, it's not. Automatic frequency scaling is a must.
                          OK, so what you want is what we're working on. Good.

                          The only reason I talked about the profile approach was that it could have happened sooner, ie earlier than dynamic PM, and that people kept asking questions about it. At this point I don't think it's worth working on unless it turns out we can't expose dynamic PM for some reason. Not sure why you think I'm "pushing it".

                          crazycheese -- do you understand that I have absolutely nothing to do with fglrx development other than occasionally passing problems I see on the forums to the development team ?

                          duby229 -- what in the world could possibly make you think I don't like the open source drivers ? The fact that you concluded this from reading crazycheese's post is a bit disturbing
                          Last edited by bridgman; 01-18-2013, 08:28 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by timothyja View Post
                            You both guys just sound like whiny children. Posting manipulative post to try and make Bridgman feel bad in order to booster the open source drivers is no only completely see through but will have no affect what so ever. I understand your frustration but you clearly have no understanding of IT from a corporate viewpoint. If there is one thing I have learn from being a developer for the passed decade it is that its extremely hard to convince management to make changes even when its a very good idea to do so, and changing from a closed development process to an open one is a huge change so I fully understand why things are constantly stalled. Changing a persons mindset is a very difficult thing to do, and when you are dealing with management which typically doesn't always have a technology background yet gets to make all the final decisions changing minds becomes all the more difficult.
                            Hi, I am going to break the rule for just one post to you.

                            I too encountered exactly same situation of "stubborn management", "corporate viewpoint" and "stalled things/minds/mindsets".
                            The morale I got however, is extremely different from yours.
                            I just let the founders of iD Software explain it:
                            http://rome.ro/games_ddici.php

                            GL

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                              Hi, I am going to break the rule for just one post to you.

                              I too encountered exactly same situation of "stubborn management", "corporate viewpoint" and "stalled things/minds/mindsets".
                              The morale I got however, is extremely different from yours.
                              I just let the founders of iD Software explain it:
                              http://rome.ro/games_ddici.php

                              GL
                              That post is in no way relevant to the conversation about open source drivers. I do not disagree with what they did many successful company's have been born in a similar fashion however that situation does not apply here. Are you suggesting the open source radeon devs should start there own company?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by timothyja View Post
                                You both guys just sound like whiny children. Posting manipulative post to try and make Bridgman feel bad in order to booster the open source drivers is no only completely see through but will have no affect what so ever. I understand your frustration but you clearly have no understanding of IT from a corporate viewpoint. If there is one thing I have learn from being a developer for the passed decade it is that its extremely hard to convince management to make changes even when its a very good idea to do so, and changing from a closed development process to an open one is a huge change so I fully understand why things are constantly stalled. Changing a persons mindset is a very difficult thing to do, and when you are dealing with management which typically doesn't always have a technology background yet gets to make all the final decisions changing minds becomes all the more difficult.

                                Personally I'm very grateful that Bridgman is thick skinned enough to take all the flak he gets in his stride, and still provide us with feedback.
                                Yes. Seriously, grow up people.

                                Thank you Bridgman for having the patience of a saint. I had hoped with Q's dismissal this kind of shenanigans would have died down. It does a disservice to us all.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X