Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nine Reasons Mesa 9.0 Is Disappointing For End-Users

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by 89c51 View Post
    MESA PEOPLE CANNOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT POWER MANAGEMENT AND VIDEO ACCELERATION.

    ITS UP TO NVIDIA AND AMD TO RELEASE DOCS
    This is not 100% true. After all the radeon driver is open source, so anybody could write proper power management. See what nouveau did without any documentation? Why shouldn't the same being possible for PM (and UVD) on the radeon side? The problem is that AMD employees can't release it (AFAIK both, proper PM and UVD code has been written in-house) cause of stupid lawyers and mesa devs don't want to do it cause they fear that AMD releases their in-house work right before (or after) they have finished. IIRC at least one of the top mesa devs knows how the PM should work, but don't code it...

    Some 3rd party programmer should step in right now, RE the proprietary drivers PM code, write a open source implementation and do a pull request. Yes, I know, this is unlikely to happen...

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by TAXI View Post
      mesa devs don't want to do it
      ... because it's the kernel driver's job, not mesa's.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by ChrisXY View Post
        ... because it's the kernel driver's job, not mesa's.
        Also dave airlie (airlied), who is the kernel graphics maintainer (read: he knows stuff about linux graphics), mentioned that they cannot do anything proper about it until AMD releases the appropriate documentation. Which is not going happen.

        If someone reverse engineers it -and i thing the same goes for nvidia- then you will probably get proper dynamic PM.

        The same for video acceleration.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by 89c51 View Post
          Also dave airlie (airlied), who is the kernel graphics maintainer (read: he knows stuff about linux graphics), mentioned that they cannot do anything proper about it until AMD releases the appropriate documentation. Which is not going happen.
          Are you saying we should stop working on trying to release PM information because you know it's never going to happen ? If so, can you provide some details so we don't waste any more time ?

          Does this apply to UVD as well as power management, or should we keep working on UVD ?

          Thanks,
          JB

          Comment


          • #20
            my humble sugestion:

            1. gather money(xorg foundation) for looots of cheap cards (too burn)
            2. set up a (semi)automated blackbox rig or two
            3. get some1 dumb enough to read hexdumps all day
            4. lock him/them in a room with the rig's for a month, no proper food till its all figured out
            5. ??
            6. profit

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by darkbasic View Post
              It isn't mesa-related but I will difinitely add:
              STILL NO DECENT RADEON POWER MANAGEMENT
              I heard there is still no decent radeon powet management

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by necro-lover View Post
                will kubuntu 12.10 get the mesa9 stuff?
                Yes, Mesa 9 release is already available in repository.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                  Are you saying we should stop working on trying to release PM information because you know it's never going to happen ? If so, can you provide some details so we don't waste any more time ?

                  Does this apply to UVD as well as power management, or should we keep working on UVD ?

                  Thanks,
                  JB
                  To be totally honest i don't have high expectation (or expectations at all) in any of these two problems the graphics drivers have. I am not impressed by AMD in that field at all while i am graceful for the fact that you pay 4-5 people to get things running.

                  I know that its not up to you neither tim to decide what gets released and i am not putting the blame on you, him or any of the mesa guys. But the result is what matters.

                  And of course you can keep working on whatever you like.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    The hell with all of you. These are mostly pretty good points. I dunno how relevant would the update to OpenGL3.2+ be but the rest I'm pretty content with.

                    It doesn't necessarily mean that you're on a bad mood just because you're bringing up some missing anticipated features in such an important component. Also I wonder who the _hell_ did think that Mesa 9.0 was somehow disappointing up until now. You dumb f*cks.

                    And no, I'm not in a bad mood myself. Just disappointed in the stupidity that I keep seeing down here. Might even quote that idiot from the other thread:

                    F*ck you in the biggest way.
                    Last edited by ArchLinux; 10-10-2012, 06:21 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by 89c51 View Post
                      To be totally honest i don't have high expectation (or expectations at all) in any of these two problems the graphics drivers have. I am not impressed by AMD in that field at all ...
                      Why not ? Everyone knows that we focused on other areas first because they had the greatest chance of delivering immediate benefits, and now we're working on these.

                      I got a lot of flak from readers here when I said we were even *working* on UVD and advanced PM, because they understood there would need to be a lot of internal work before we would have anything to show for it and a good chance we would end up having to toss some work and start over a couple of times along the way.

                      It seems somehow wrong to attack us for spending time on difficult areas that are not likely to show immediate results *and* to attack us for not having results in those areas yet.

                      If you're just saying "I wish it were easier" I sure wouldn't disagree with that

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                        Everyone knows that we focused on other areas first because they had the greatest chance of delivering immediate benefits, and now we're working on these.
                        But many people don't agree on the immediate benefits. For many people longer battery runtime or even the step from "I can't use my notebook with radeon since it overheats" to "I can now use my notebook with radeon" would be quite the benefit.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                          Why not ? Everyone knows that we focused on other areas first because they had the greatest chance of delivering immediate benefits, and now we're working on these.

                          I got a lot of flak from readers here when I said we were even *working* on UVD and advanced PM, because they understood there would need to be a lot of internal work before we would have anything to show for it and a good chance we would end up having to toss some work and start over a couple of times along the way.

                          It seems somehow wrong to attack us for spending time on difficult areas that are not likely to show immediate results *and* to attack us for not having results in those areas yet.

                          If you're just saying "I wish it were easier" I sure wouldn't disagree with that
                          I know that you focus on getting things to run and basic (2d 3d etc) features and as i said i appreciate very much the fact that you employ these people. Its probably the fact that i had greater expectations. At least for PM.

                          And the "attack" is not to the people doing the hard work. Its to those people that said no after all the work.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by gens View Post
                            my humble sugestion:

                            1. gather money(xorg foundation) for looots of cheap cards (too burn)
                            2. set up a (semi)automated blackbox rig or two
                            3. get some1 dumb enough to read hexdumps all day
                            4. lock him/them in a room with the rig's for a month, no proper food till its all figured out
                            5. ??
                            6. profit
                            You made me laugh out loud. I would definately vote for number 4.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by 89c51 View Post
                              Also dave airlie (airlied), who is the kernel graphics maintainer (read: he knows stuff about linux graphics), mentioned that they cannot do anything proper about it until AMD releases the appropriate documentation. Which is not going happen.

                              If someone reverse engineers it -and i thing the same goes for nvidia- then you will probably get proper dynamic PM.

                              The same for video acceleration.
                              Rumour has it that there is code for both of these written by AMD which is stuck in a limbo due to technical/legal review.

                              It would be really amazing if this were true and the code is released at some point.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                It's not rumour -- I posted about it here a couple of times.

                                This is the same process we did for almost everything else -- we need to write some working code first to figure out what programming info is "must have" for the initial release, then we start working through each part of the programming info to either get approval to release it or find a way to make a good driver without it.

                                We knew UVD would be tough and explicitly carved it out of our initial plans & announcement but advanced PM turned out to be a *lot* harder to release than I initially expected.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X