Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nouveau's Gallium3D Driver Gets Video Boost

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by TechMage89 View Post
    GEM is a requirement for both KMS and Gallium.

    Intel has all three, although their Gallium driver is still experimental.

    ATI has working GEM and KMS in experimental branches (neither is a function of the Xorg driver, so radeon vs radeonhd doesn't matter.) Experimental DRI2 Also exists in radeon branches, I believe. Work has started on Gallium, but it doesn't yet produce any useful result.

    Nouveau has experimental GEM, KMS, and Gallium, although all of it is still very incomplete and not really ready for end-users yet.
    Wow. This is a lot of keep track up =)

    There should be a page like http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature for these things =)

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by some-guy View Post
      It should be more like
      Code:
                        | KMS       | Memory Manager | DRI2   | Gallium3D |
      +-----------------+-----------+----------------+--------+-----------+
      | RadeonHD/Radeon | DEV       | GEM/TTM        | DEV    | DEV       |
      +-----------------+-----------+----------------+--------+-----------+
      | Openchrome      | NO        | TTM            | NO     | NO        |
      +-----------------+-----------+----------------+--------+-----------+
      | Nouveau         | DEV(NV50) | GEM/TTM        | NO     | DEV       |
      +-----------------+-----------+----------------+--------+-----------+
      | Intel           | MERGED    | GEM            | MERGED | DEV       |
      +-----------------+-----------+----------------+--------+-----------+
      Radeon/RadeonHD are just separate DDX drivers they share dri/drm code

      Also GEM or TTM is a requirement for KMS/DRI2/G3D, however TTM isn't in the kernel so GEM is required to have it merged
      This one cool break down! Thanks a lot =)

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Louise View Post
        So Gallium3D should replace Mesa?
        Gallium3D plus its drivers replaces the current HW drivers in Mesa. The rest of Mesa stays. Gallium3D is also probably going to be useful without Mesa, eg the recent article about implementing XvMC over Gallium3D.

        Originally posted by Louise View Post
        GEM replace TTM (for gfx cards without dedicated gfx ram) ?
        The GEM API is replacing the TTM API everywhere... but part of the GEM API is defined as "driver specific" so each driver will probably have different calls there. So far the initial implementation of GEM is not being used on cards with dedicated video memory, and instead the devs are using their existing TTM implementations.

        It's best to think about the API part of GEM, or things will get very confusing very quickly

        Originally posted by Louise View Post
        And there is no replacement for DRI2?
        Right, but DRI2 replaces DRI.

        The other new thing is Redirected Direct Rendering, which needs DRI2 and GEM (DRI2 used to need TTM rather than GEM, but it was pulled back and reimplemented over GEM). RDR combines the speed of direct rendering with the compositer compatibility of AIGLX (indirect rendering), in other words all your apps still work but don't flicker under Compiz. It's possible that RDR work is being bundled in with DRI2 but I'm not sure.

        It's mostly RDR and KMS that will make users' lives better; everything else is critical infrastructure to get there. Mesa-over-Gallium3D is hard to categorize; it'll do the same as Mesa did before, but hopefully will be faster and easier to optimize & enhance over time.

        Comment


        • #19
          The GEM, Gallium, etc. chart is fine for graphics developers.
          End users need a chart more like:

          Code:
                             +-----------+----------------+--------+-----------+---------+
                             | Xv        | XvMC           | mpeg4  | H.264     | theora  |
           +-----------------+-----------+----------------+--------+-----------+---------+
           | RadeonHD/Radeon |           |                |        |           |         |
           +-----------------+-----------+----------------+--------+-----------+---------+
           | Openchrome      |   Yes     |  Yes           |   ?    |    ?      |    ?    |
           +-----------------+-----------+----------------+--------+-----------+---------+
           | Nouveau         |           |                |        |           |         |
           +-----------------+-----------+----------------+--------+-----------+---------+
           | Intel           |           |                |        |           |         |
           +-----------------+-----------+----------------+--------+-----------+---------+
          And we need to know what resolution and bitrate the driver/chip combo can handle.

          I'd like to see a chart like http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature
          for Chrome, Rage, Fire*, ...

          Comment

          Working...
          X