Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nouveau vs. NVIDIA Linux Comparison Shows Shortcomings

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

  • #51
    Originally posted by brosis View Post
    You protest against removal of highly unstable high-explosive bomb (because it causes X freeze, crashes and kernel panics unless lucky), because you eventually were lucky enough. You sure don't care about other people experiences, only your own case settles matters.
    If you have problems with the nouveau drivers you file a bug, and if it was causing massive problems then it would indeed be disabled in mainline, you can be certain of that. Obviously it's not, only retards like you who doesn't understand the difference between development versions and tested versions which is what is pushed through repositories.

    I'll try to explain since you are so f***ing stupid, currently Michael are testing the unreleased kernel 3.9 version which is currently being TESTED for REGRESSIONS, NO distro is using it.

    Then in a while when 3.9 is finally released, still NO DISTRO WILL USE IT IN THEIR STABLE REPOS, it will go through both UPSTREAM and DOWNSTREAM TESTING, and bugs will invariably be found, fixes will be made, and then perhaps by 3.9.1-3.9.3 or something depending on how many bugs/regressions are found, a BLEEDING EDGE distro like Arch may switch to 3.9.X. So when Michael states that the latest 3.9 GIT kernel version he is using for testing has regressions, THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN ON PEOPLE'S MACHINES UNLESS THEY ARE TESTING NEW KERNELS/DEVELOPMENT VERSIONS OF NOUVEAU/MESA/INSERT COMPONENT HERE. Do you UNDERSTAND?

    Originally posted by brosis View Post
    They dont have "VERY LIMITED manpower", they care SHIT about manpower calculations.
    WTF is 'manpower calculations'? And of course they have very limited manpower given what they try to achive, which is to reverse engineer the functionality contained in a large range of graphic cards. Where the hell do idiots like you come from? Is there a online troll course where the prerequisite is that you have to be really stupid to apply?

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by wargames View Post
      I'm sorry, but YOU are full of bullshit. You are using Blender and are probably refusing to use the Cycles rendering engine CUDA acceleration because of what ? code purity ?
      If you read what I wrote I stated I did 3d sculpting and modeling, rendering is not what I'm interested in (I'm sculpting stuff which I want to 3d print). Had the performance I get when doing 3d sculpting/modeling been underwhelming then I would certainly have switched to the proprietary driver, and I think nothing less of anyone who prefers it, but the performance is perfectly fine with Nouveau so 'I' see no reason to install the binary blob.

      Originally posted by wargames View Post
      You need to grow up and realise there are programs distributed in binary form out there.
      Oh really? Like all the humble bundle and other games I own, what a big surprise, tell me more!

      I have no problem with binary programs, but I certainly prefer open source, particularly when it comes to code which is needed for my machine to operate, not to mention how convenient it is to have everything supported out-of-the-box. Nouveau gives me this, and I am very thankful for their excellent work, and I hope that in the future I will be able to have those benefits under Haiku aswell.

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
        Then again, having docs may very well raise interest in the project. It wouldn't look like doing things blindly any more.
        Agreed but good luck trying to get something as simple as the register command documentation out of nVidia...they'd say they cannot release that due to IP issues.

        Comment


        • #54
          Originally posted by DeepDayze View Post
          Agreed but good luck trying to get something as simple as the register command documentation out of nVidia...they'd say they cannot release that due to IP issues.
          Even AMD doesn't release anything like that.

          Comment


          • #55
            @brent

            Curious, I thought I have all these register headers in my kernel source, saying which registers are which. And a set of PDFs documenting most of them in more detail.

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by curaga View Post
              @brent
              Curious, I thought I have all these register headers in my kernel source, saying which registers are which.
              That's not documentation. The list is both incomplete and undocumented. Source code almost never qualifies as documentation, and the radeon driver is no exception.

              And a set of PDFs documenting most of them in more detail.
              For some very old GPUs. There is no documentation for R700 and up and it's hardly useful for contemporary GPUs.

              Comment


              • #57
                Originally posted by brent View Post
                For some very old GPUs. There is no documentation for R700 and up and it's hardly useful for contemporary GPUs.
                Actually the main docs are for "r6xx/r7xx" and they are still fairly useful today. The major changes from one generation to the next were in the shader ISA, and new documents have been released for each new generation. Registers do move around (different offsets) but the source code headers cover that fairly well.

                Comment


                • #58
                  Originally posted by XorEaxEax View Post
                  If you have problems with the nouveau drivers you file a bug, and if it was causing massive problems then it would indeed be disabled in mainline, you can be certain of that. Obviously it's not, only retards like you who doesn't understand the difference between development versions and tested versions which is what is pushed through repositories.

                  I'll try to explain since you are so f***ing stupid, currently Michael are testing the unreleased kernel 3.9 version which is currently being TESTED for REGRESSIONS, NO distro is using it.

                  Then in a while when 3.9 is finally released, still NO DISTRO WILL USE IT IN THEIR STABLE REPOS, it will go through both UPSTREAM and DOWNSTREAM TESTING, and bugs will invariably be found, fixes will be made, and then perhaps by 3.9.1-3.9.3 or something depending on how many bugs/regressions are found, a BLEEDING EDGE distro like Arch may switch to 3.9.X. So when Michael states that the latest 3.9 GIT kernel version he is using for testing has regressions, THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN ON PEOPLE'S MACHINES UNLESS THEY ARE TESTING NEW KERNELS/DEVELOPMENT VERSIONS OF NOUVEAU/MESA/INSERT COMPONENT HERE. Do you UNDERSTAND?


                  WTF is 'manpower calculations'? And of course they have very limited manpower given what they try to achive, which is to reverse engineer the functionality contained in a large range of graphic cards. Where the hell do idiots like you come from? Is there a online troll course where the prerequisite is that you have to be really stupid to apply?
                  I tested nouveau under Debian Stable.
                  Also, testing versions are usually much more stable than "Stable" ones, due to commited bugfixes.

                  And I alreadly cleared up things with calim, so rant off. I am not against nouveau, I am against developers behaving like buddies next door and expecting driver quality to be something different.

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Originally posted by brent View Post
                    The list is both incomplete and undocumented.
                    The only missing registers AFAIK are for (patented) features not yet exposed, and some they don't consider important. BTW Bridgman I still want those performance counters

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Originally posted by brosis View Post
                      Also, testing versions are usually much more stable than "Stable" ones, due to commited bugfixes.
                      You seem very confused. Testing is where, as the name implies, 'testing' of new code is done, it's here (and of course upstream) that bugs are found and (hopefully) fixed.

                      Once these found bugs have been fixed and the code seems to work proper, it will be moved into 'stable'. So I seriously doubt that code from testing is 'usually' more stable than code from stable in Debian, it defies logic.

                      Do you have anything to back this up with, like some Debian developers telling people that if they want stability they should use 'testing'?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X