Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mesa 7.3 Gets Primed With GLSL 1.20, GEM, DRI2

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

  • Mesa 7.3 Gets Primed With GLSL 1.20, GEM, DRI2

    Phoronix: Mesa 7.3 Gets Primed With GLSL 1.20, GEM, DRI2

    It's been over four months since Mesa 7.1 was released and about three months since Mesa 7.2 (the stabilized version of 7.1), but now Mesa 7.3 is getting primed and ready to enter the limelight. As the first step, Mesa 7.3 Release Candidate 1 will be pushed out shortly. One of the primary features of Mesa 7.3 is enhanced support for GLSL 1.20...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=Njk3OQ

  • #2
    so ATI users will have to wait for Mesa 7.5/7.6 to get DRI2 ?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by val-gaav View Post
      so ATI users will have to wait for Mesa 7.5/7.6 to get DRI2 ?
      I don't think Mesa itself is holding back ATI DRI2; it's just a matter of the driver(s) taking advantage of it (and using X.org 1.6). Jerome Glisse is working on DRI2 with the open-source radeon driver: http://jglisse.livejournal.com/1623.html

      Comment


      • #4
        yeh ati users may have to wait as i understand it

        Comment


        • #5
          Can anyone confirm if the Intel drivers now report OpenGL 2.1 support instead of just 1.4? Eric Anholt said he committed the fix to Mesa master in October.

          Comment


          • #6
            Code:
            glxinfo | grep "OpenGL version string"
            OpenGL version string: 2.1 Mesa 7.3-devel
            That's on my G45, running something close to 7.3 rc1.

            Comment


            • #7
              Why don't all developers put their efforts into Gallium3D instead?

              It seems Gallium3D is going to replace Mesa3D totally, meaning a new proyect. Or it will use Mesa3D code in some way?

              I have high hopes that Gallium3D can accelerate the 3D support of new APIs and new OpenGL versions. Let's see if OpenGL evolves faster to compete with DirectX, their Brazil-like "bureaucrazy" and makes the Khronos Group seem like a bad joke.

              I even can't understand why the Khronos Group doesn't support OpenGL implementations financially and in a technical way.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by whizse View Post
                Code:
                glxinfo | grep "OpenGL version string"
                OpenGL version string: 2.1 Mesa 7.3-devel
                That's on my G45, running something close to 7.3 rc1.
                Yes! Thank you!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by timofonic View Post
                  Why don't all developers put their efforts into Gallium3D instead?

                  It seems Gallium3D is going to replace Mesa3D totally, meaning a new proyect. Or it will use Mesa3D code in some way?

                  I have high hopes that Gallium3D can accelerate the 3D support of new APIs and new OpenGL versions. Let's see if OpenGL evolves faster to compete with DirectX, their Brazil-like "bureaucrazy" and makes the Khronos Group seem like a bad joke.

                  I even can't understand why the Khronos Group doesn't support OpenGL implementations financially and in a technical way.
                  As far as I understand it, Gallium3D is more an abstraction layer than an OpenGL implementation. The graphics drivers are required to expose some low-level functionality to a general shader language, which in term is used to provide an OpenGL 1.x/2.x/3.x implementation which is transparent to all video card models/vendors/...

                  So Gallium3D is more of a framework which is used inside of Mesa to implement OpenGL.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by NeoBrain View Post
                    As far as I understand it, Gallium3D is more an abstraction layer than an OpenGL implementation. The graphics drivers are required to expose some low-level functionality to a general shader language, which in term is used to provide an OpenGL 1.x/2.x/3.x implementation which is transparent to all video card models/vendors/...

                    So Gallium3D is more of a framework which is used inside of Mesa to implement OpenGL.
                    OK, so Gallium3D is something that is going to merge into the main Mesa3D branch and not replace it. Interesting to know.

                    http://liquidat.wordpress.com/2008/0...re-it-fits-in/
                    http://jrfonseca.blogspot.com/2008/0...gallium3d.html

                    One of the things I don't like of Mesa3D and such is that isn't community based development but done by a corporation. They are hiding some parts of the development phase like shamed of something dirty they are doing with the code, instead following an open and community based development process.

                    There's a git source code repository, but they expressed that some work is underground and not show. This is true for all FOSS projects, but maybe they don't follow the "release early, release often" totally and follow a somewhat conservative approach when releasing certain source code to the public (I'm not talking about end user, but those geeks able to use a compiler and look into the code). I just desire them luck and not being pissed off again with an Intel alternative like with TTM vs GEM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      From a Mesa perspective, Gallium3D is just a new HW driver layer at the lowest level of the Mesa code, alongside all the existing HW driver abstractions. You still need Mesa if you want to run OpenGL applications. Mesa is roughly a million lines of code; Gallium3D won't be replacing all of that.

                      We plan to stick with the old Mesa HW driver model until we have basic 3D functionality going for our latest GPUs (for the simple reason that developers know it and just finished bringing up the same functionality on 5xx parts), then to jump across to the Gallium3D-based code paths for all subsequent development. We think that will get functionality into our users hands most quickly -- and most of the code we write will be directly useable in the Gallium3D drivers.
                      Last edited by bridgman; 01-11-2009, 10:48 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by timofonic View Post
                        One of the things I don't like of Mesa3D and such is that isn't community based development but done by a corporation. They are hiding some parts of the development phase like shamed of something dirty they are doing with the code, instead following an open and community based development process.
                        Ha! You're pretty funny dude. Mesa is a community-based project, and luckily enough, there are some corporations ( Intel, AMD, Tungsten / VMWare ) as major players in the project, without which not a lot would be happening. There is no requirement for anyone to instantly release any new code they come up with, minute-by-minute. What would you have them do ... all come around to your place and do all the development in your lounge room so you can report any dodgy happenings that you think someone should 'be ashamed of'?

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X