Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Broadcom Crystal HD Support For MPlayer, FFmpeg

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

  • #41
    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    If the information is safe to have in the public then we would release it ourselves rather than forcing the community to reverse-engineer it. If the information is not safe to have in the public then providing enough information to enable reverse engineering would be the worst of all worlds.

    Determining whether the information *is* safe to release is a slow and expensive process, unfortunately. We have started the process but it's not particularly predictable in terms of either duration or outcome.
    That really is a shame and what really annoys me about "IP"

    Could you at least stated what API you'd prefer any software or shader implementations to use. I'm thinking specifically VA-API, VDPAU and XvBA. The latter of course seems to be still born.

    If the 3 major OSS camps could decide on which is best I'm sure there would be a lot of shared code in implementing acceleration on the different chipsets especially is shaders are used

    Comment


    • #42
      I suspect the thing that really annoys you in this case is actually "DRM" more than "IP"

      AFAIK the open source developers don't care too much about API - writing the decoder is the hard part, and the same code could be wrapped in any API that supports the appropriate level of abstraction. If you are doing VLD-level decode then any of the APIs should work, but if you are only offloading a subset of the decode tasks (say IDCT/MC/deblock) then VA-API is a good choice since it offers a wider choice of entry points.
      Test signature

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by bridgman View Post
        I suspect the thing that really annoys you in this case is actually "DRM" more than "IP"

        AFAIK the open source developers don't care too much about API - writing the decoder is the hard part, and the same code could be wrapped in any API that supports the appropriate level of abstraction. If you are doing VLD-level decode then any of the APIs should work, but if you are only offloading a subset of the decode tasks (say IDCT/MC/deblock) then VA-API is a good choice since it offers a wider choice of entry points.
        Is there really a difference? Which territories are effected by DRM issues?

        As for API not being important - it would stop Adobe bitchin' ;-)

        Would that mean two state trackers with one auxiliary module powering both of them

        Comment


        • #44
          Yeah, the difference is pretty significant. More specifically, the impact of being wrong on a DRM decision is much higher than the impact of being wrong on an IP decision. The information we have released so far mostly involved IP decisions, while UVD decisions are primarily related to DRM.

          If the goal was to share code across multiple APIs on an ongoing basis then some kind of shared module would work, or the code could simply be built once for each API supported. It might also be possible to have a single chunk of code expose multiple APIs, but I don't think we have looked at that.
          Test signature

          Comment


          • #45
            deanjo:
            >> Just curious, what would make you say something like that ?
            > Probably out of frustration from the lack of AMD's efforts bringing hardware decoding to linux.

            s/linux/FLOSS/

            In my case FreeBSD.

            bridgman:
            > assuming you don't count any of the work that *has* been done over the last year in that area

            Work has been done? I've been skimming the headlines on phoronix and reading
            anything that looks remotely relevant. Did I miss something? Are there other
            news sources I should be watching? Progress on video decoding would have been
            big news.

            > video decoding is more important than the 2D and 3D acceleration required to
            > support compositing and a modern desktop and agree that we should stop
            > implementing and documenting 2D/3D acceleration hardware on new GPUs for a
            > year or two and focus on video acceleration instead

            Code:
            #     # #######  #####    ###
             #   #  #       #     #   ###
              # #   #       #         ###
               #    #####    #####     #
               #    #             #
               #    #       #     #   ###
               #    #######  #####    ###
            Instead of doing a half-assed job on all chips, pick one chip and get *everything*
            working and working well. Then we will have a chip we can buy and use. As it
            is there is no chip we can buy and use.

            Warning: lame car analogy ahead
            Imagine going to a car dealership and there are say, 15 different models
            available. But you can only use reverse gear. You can't use a forward gear
            in any of them. Wouldn't you rather there be one model that allows you
            to use the forward gears as well as reverse? Would you buy a car that
            only had a reverse gear?

            We don't need compositing. We don't need 3D. We don't need a "modern" desktop.
            A simple window manager works just fine. But there is no alternative for
            video decoding.

            It has been 3.3 years since the first batch of documentation was released.
            Therefore more than 3.3 years since the effort started. Where is the revised
            UVD with the DRM crappola seperated out to make it easy to document the decoding
            part?

            deanjo:
            > He probably associates the lack of effort in that area with lack of interest.

            Bridgman has posted that he doesn't care about video. So it is pretty obvious
            why video decode is at the bottom of his priority list.

            What percentage of the general population (the general population, not just the
            phoronix users) cares about video? We can use TV ownership as a proxy. What
            percentage of households have a TV? Probably 99%. What percentage of the
            population cares about a "modern desktop"? A whole lot less than 99%

            According to yahoo, AMD has a market cap of $6.07 Billion, a profit margin of
            19.97%, and 10,400 full time employees. And you are telling us that AMD does
            not have the resources to provide documentation for its products?

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by Dieter View Post
              Bridgman has posted that he doesn't care about video. So it is pretty obvious why video decode is at the bottom of his priority list.
              That's the part I'm asking about. Where did I say that ?
              Test signature

              Comment


              • #47
                Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                Also the fact that even on the blob side of AMD the efforts there on video decoding acceleration hasn't been all that great either. Even S3 has a better solution then what ATI is offering at the moment. You take a look at nvnews.net forums. Stephen Warren is in there like a rabid dog hammering out and resolving vdpau issues.
                Don't be so sure about S3, even Stephen said "it kind of works" to not say something else... S3 is maintaining both APIs though.

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by Dieter View Post
                  We don't need compositing. We don't need 3D. We don't need a "modern" desktop.
                  A simple window manager works just fine. But there is no alternative for
                  video decoding.

                  What percentage of the general population (the general population, not just the
                  phoronix users) cares about video? We can use TV ownership as a proxy. What
                  percentage of households have a TV? Probably 99%. What percentage of the
                  population cares about a "modern desktop"? A whole lot less than 99%
                  wut?

                  Yeah, most people don't "need" compositing, 3D, or a modern desktop, but most linux desktop users want at least one of those 3, and the same can be said for hardware video decoding, we don't really "need" that either, but we do want it.
                  However, you're suggesting no one cares about compositing, 3D and a "modern desktop", all they want is video decoding. Bollocks.
                  Just because it's your main desire doesn't mean everyone else is the same, and given that video decoding via software is adequate for most tasks with a decent cpu, unlike 3D and compositing, it's understandable that hardware decoding is a lower priority.

                  Like you, I use a good old fashioned window manager too rather than a full DE with a ton of silly compositing effects, but this isn't true of the vast majority of desktop linux users, and if such window managers were the only options available I'd wager there would be much, much less desktop linux users than there is now.
                  Therefore, I don't think it's much of a leap to assume, comtrary to what you've stated, that people [i]do]/i] "need" compositing, 3D, and a "modern desktop", at least as much as they need hardware decoding, and most likely much, much more.

                  Anyways, if your priority is hardware decoded video, then you do have options, either nvidia hardware with closed source drivers, or thanks to broadcom (as this thread is supposed to be about, you smelly hijackers :P ) you can now get it with more or less any GPU, and with open source drivers to boot!

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Bloody god damn editing time limit and friggin stupid bloody typos, grrrr argh...

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by gbeauche View Post
                      Don't be so sure about S3, even Stephen said "it kind of works" to not say something else... S3 is maintaining both APIs though.
                      S3's "it kind of works" is still better the AMD's "doesn't work". I have had a chance to actually play around with the 540 GTX and when it came to vdpau I didn't encounter any issues.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X