View Poll Results: Should RadeonHD start implementing Gallium?

Voters
31. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    24 77.42%
  • No

    2 6.45%
  • They should merge...

    5 16.13%
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 35

Thread: Should RadeonHD start implementing gallium?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    /dev/random
    Posts
    218

    Default Should RadeonHD start implementing gallium?

    Do you think radeon should work on getting DRI enabled, while radeonHD implements TTM/GEM and DRI2, so that they are *actually* doing different things?

    EDIT: As bridgman pointed out, they share mesa/dri so what happens in one happens with the other.
    Last edited by some-guy; 06-23-2008 at 04:13 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    /dev/random
    Posts
    218

    Default

    I think they should because this would allow users to have DRI quicky (via radeon), then have full gallium shortly after that(via radeonhd), also this would allow using http://www.bitblit.org/gsoc/g3dvl/index.shtml for initial xmvc decoding

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,464

    Default

    Um... hold on !!

    There is only one 3d stack and one pool of 3d developers. The radeonhd 3d stack is the same as the radeon 3d stack. It's not like there are two groups independently developing the same 3d support.

    We can split up developers and move more slowly on more things, but I would rather see 6xx 3d supported before that happens since it's going to take a fair amount of work. The recent addition to radeonhd is "dri support", ie the ability to interact with the drm and mesa 3d drivers, *not* the actual 3d code -- 3d drivers are in different projects :

    *** ddx aka X driver (modesetting, 2D, video) :

    radeon : http://gitweb.freedesktop.org/?p=xor....git;a=summary
    radeonhd : http://gitweb.freedesktop.org/?p=xor...onhd;a=summary

    *** DRM driver, (kernel component, required for 3d, optional for 2d) :

    http://gitweb.freedesktop.org/?p=mesa/drm.git;a=summary

    *** 3D driver (OpenGL) :

    http://gitweb.freedesktop.org/?p=mes....git;a=summary
    Last edited by bridgman; 06-15-2008 at 10:37 AM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    /dev/random
    Posts
    218

    Default

    So the only difference between them is DDX?
    I thought they only shared DRI, but if they also share DRM, then there is going to be a long argument about which one to use...

    Why did radeon even add r500+ support anyway?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,150

    Default

    Well, the reason is, that radeon driver is serious business, as you can see here (I did these benchmarks some minutes ago with gtkperf -c 100):



    radeon has new features more quickly, because it uses AtomBIOS, while the RadeonHD developers write everything by themself.

    Btw.: I am wondering if there will be EXA support for fglrx in the future... radeon+EXA just rocks

    (Radeon X1900 XT 512 / R580)
    Last edited by d2kx; 06-15-2008 at 12:43 PM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    /dev/random
    Posts
    218

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by d2kx View Post

    Btw.: I am wondering if there will be EXA support for fglrx in the future... radeon+EXA just rocks

    (Radeon X1900 XT 512 / R580)
    AFAIK, it already exists

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,464

    Default

    I'm guessing that's what the textured2d and texturedxrender options are about but I don't know that for sure. I guess it could still be XAA but using the 3d engine more, not sure.

    Anyways, I think those options are still work-in-progress right now but there's no intention to leave them that way.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,464

    Default

    d2kx, if you want some fun you could try agd5f's personal "quick and dirty acceleration port" radeonhd branch in git. That's an initial port of fresh radeon acceleration code into radeonhd, prior to merging in some of the accel changes already done in rhd. Run it with drm for best results.

    Only EXA is enabled so far, I imagine XAA falls back to shadowfb.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,150

    Default

    Textured2D is for R600. It is for good 2D performance using their 3D engines. It is stable and enabled by default on them. I don't think it has anything to do with EXA.
    TexturedXrender is nothing but broken.

    Didn't know about that branch of agd5f, I might give it a try soon, thanks for the notice...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,464

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by d2kx View Post
    TexturedXrender is nothing but broken.
    Sure, but it could be broken EXA

    I mentioned agd5f's branch because it is also being tested over on the #radeonhd IRC channel with some different tests. We had planned to let him finish coding first (XAA and textured video etc..), but what can you do ?

    I knew we used the 3d engine on 6xx, but didn't know that was tied to the Textured2D option. Makes sense now, thanks.
    Last edited by bridgman; 06-15-2008 at 01:20 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •