Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RadeonHD 1.2.2 & 1.2.3 Drivers Released

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

  • #16
    Hmm,

    Added support for RV770, RS780, M82, M86, and M88.
    So no RV730 in this release, yet.

    cheers

    Opteron

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by lucky_ View Post
      @bridgman
      I'am still curious about two things :
      It's said that work is going on in private repos under NDA for the 56/7xx, but the IP review is still an issue.
      - Did you receive any feedback from the IP gurus after your last attempt ?
      - How can you be sure that the code that hits you internal repos won't conflict with the IP review (suppose you use subsets a,b,c in your repos, but the IPists allow you to you use subsets a and c only). Will this mean that after the IP review you will need a cleaning code review ?
      The nature of the IP reviews means we get tons of feedback. It's not a question of "sending it off to the IP review" -- a bunch of senior technical folks get together and talk about the info we plan to release and the risks associated with releasing that info. Each of the issues raised gets investigated, trying to (a) figure out how big and real the risk is, (b) look for ways to eliminate or reduce the risk while still being able to do useful open soruce development work, and (c) in parallel, determine how much of the risk exists based only on information which already exists. For both of the reviews so far we ran into roadblocks before getting into the details of the 3D engine -- this time I'm hoping to get everything through.

      Any time we do development work under NDA we assume that a code review and revision may be required before the resulting code can be released. As long as the amount of code involved is relatively small (as it is in this case) that's not too much of a problem, particularly since we usually can say "here's all the info but only use these bits for now" during development. Before we start NDA work we evaluate the risk of the "IP we don't release" permanently tainting the developers and making it difficult for them to do their ongoing work, and if the risk seems at all high then we don't even release the info under NDA. One of those little memory-wipe wands from "Men In Black" would be real handy but for now all we have is NDAs
      Last edited by bridgman; 10-14-2008, 09:16 AM.

      Comment


      • #18
        AMD's actions angers me!

        ADM's actions makes me angry. They talk about open source support and releases some documentation now and then, but clearly priorities are elesewhere.

        There is clear disparity in priorities with closed source drivers and open source documantation. If AMD realy wanted to help us (and itself) it would put more effort to releasing documentation faster. I don't necessarily mean full 3d, but at least 2d acceleration and video so that drivers would be usefull for desktop and hdtv.

        I'm currently considering to by Radeon HD 4850 to my gaming machine which is also in linux TV use. And 780G board to work machine which is also MythTV server. Currently I have to decide which one (AMD/ATI or Nvidia) sucks less in open source front

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by bridgman View Post
          The nature of the IP reviews means we get tons of feedback. It's not a question of "sending it off to the IP review" -- a bunch of senior technical folks get together and talk about the info we plan to release and the risks associated with releasing that info. Each of the issues raised gets investigated, trying to (a) figure out how big and real the risk is, (b) look for ways to eliminate or reduce the risk while still being able to do useful open soruce development work, and (c) in parallel, determine how much of the risk exists based only on information which already exists. For both of the reviews so far we ran into roadblocks before getting into the details of the 3D engine -- this time I'm hoping to get everything through.

          Any time we do development work under NDA we assume that a code review and revision may be required before the resulting code can be released. As long as the amount of code involved is relatively small (as it is in this case) that's not too much of a problem, particularly since we usually can say "here's all the info but only use these bits for now" during development. Before we start NDA work we evaluate the risk of the "IP we don't release" permanently tainting the developers and making it difficult for them to do their ongoing work, and if the risk seems at all high then we don't even release the info under NDA. One of those little memory-wipe wands from "Men In Black" would be real handy but for now all we have is NDAs
          Each time you explain what goes on behind the scene, I am amazed how much work and money there is being spend!

          So thanks a lot for that =)

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Anato View Post
            ADM's actions makes me angry. They talk about open source support and releases some documentation now and then, but clearly priorities are elesewhere.

            There is clear disparity in priorities with closed source drivers and open source documantation. If AMD realy wanted to help us (and itself) it would put more effort to releasing documentation faster. I don't necessarily mean full 3d, but at least 2d acceleration and video so that drivers would be usefull for desktop and hdtv.
            I think AMD have been VERY good to Linux, taken in consideration the marked share Linux have for gaming. If that marked share can be measured at all.

            Based on the many articles here at Phornoix, and just the comments in this thread the thing that stalls the release of specs is IP that someone else holds.

            Imagine if it is Intel that holds the IP for something in the R600 specs?

            Edit: Or worse: What is it is Microsoft have have IP's in the R600 specs?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Louise View Post
              I think AMD have been VERY good to Linux, taken in consideration the marked share Linux have for gaming. If that marked share can be measured at all.
              Gaming is not everything where graphic cards are used in linux. And I would argue that gaming is not even top five. There are myriad of things other than 3d-gaming where basic and solid graphic card drivers are essential. Top on my list are work and other 2d use of computers.

              Comment


              • #22
                I have to say that there is no big difference for my HD4850. I still can't watch 720p, atleast GTK feels faster.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Sorry people,I'm a bit dumb....
                  How it is the support for the RS690 especially in a MythTv enviroment?
                  I would like switch from the FGLRX binary to this driver.
                  Thanks.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Dream on:

                    Code:
                    **) RADEONHD(0): Option "AccelMethod" "EXA"
                    (**) RADEONHD(0): Option "UseAtomBIOS" "true"
                    (WW) RADEONHD(0): RV770: HW 2D acceleration is not implemented yet.
                    There goes EXA

                    Card still runs too hot and moving a window or scrolling eats up all the CPU.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Anato View Post
                      ADM's actions makes me angry. ...
                      There is clear disparity in priorities with closed source drivers and open source documantation...[SNIP]
                      No no, you got it all wrong, both the closed and open source drivers suck equally. No disparity.

                      One sucks because its not stable/clean, hence unusable.
                      The other sucks because it has no features, hence unusable.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Uhm, just about all the basic functionality, 2d/3d acceleration and Xv is available for <r600.

                        Support for r600 and up is in the works, but these cards have a totally different architecture, and there are only a few open source developers who are able to work on the drivers at this time, because AMD is having problems clearing the documentation for release because of legal issues.

                        To be clear, the present situation as regards the open-source drivers is NO ONE's FAULT. It's a combination of limited resources and unforeseen problems. Whining that your HD2xxx H3xxx or HD4xxx card still doesn't work is NOT HELPFUL.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Anato View Post
                          ADM's actions makes me angry. They talk about open source support and releases some documentation now and then, but clearly priorities are elesewhere.

                          There is clear disparity in priorities with closed source drivers and open source documantation. If AMD realy wanted to help us (and itself) it would put more effort to releasing documentation faster. I don't necessarily mean full 3d, but at least 2d acceleration and video so that drivers would be usefull for desktop and hdtv.
                          You can't have 2d alone because that relies on 3d on the newer cards. So you won't see any news about 2d unless you firstly see 3d specs opened . Same thing goes for the video. But HDTV with the open driver will always be tricky, coz you need video acceleration on the GPU I think, if you want decent results... besides maybe some big changes need to be done in X as well.
                          Last edited by sundown; 10-14-2008, 05:31 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Whatever is happening to Gallium?

                            Why didnt AMD contract Tungsten for the driver, instead of Novel?

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by cruiseoveride View Post
                              Whatever is happening to Gallium?

                              Why didnt AMD contract Tungsten for the driver, instead of Novel?
                              Contract ? AFAIK AMD's releasing documents to the OpenSource folks, which are .. in this case employed by Novell ...

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by cruiseoveride View Post
                                Whatever is happening to Gallium?

                                Why didnt AMD contract Tungsten for the driver, instead of Novel?
                                Maybe because Novell doesn't do hardware?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X