Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 55 of 55

Thread: When'll AMD Opensource Drivers be feature-complete for Evergreen chips

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,023

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rakot View Post
    Is there any news about radeonsi working with xorg 1.13? As far as I know there were some problems with glamour and x server 1.13. What is the current state?
    Latest message on the list:
    http://lists.freedesktop.org/archive...ry/000291.html

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,386

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Figueiredo View Post
    The point I was trying to make is not related to the total amount of third party IP, but the relative amount, i.e., intel has been able to release PM code and hardware video accelaration. I assume this is because those blocks are completely desinged in house or at least contain very little third party IP.
    Could be, but I think the more likely reason is that their open source efforts have been running uninterrupted for a longer period of time. We had a ~5 year gap after ATI entered the workstation business when it was hoped that the proprietary driver could handle everything. We get a lot of flak for dividing efforts between open source and proprietary drivers but it still seems like the only approach which covers all the bases including high end 3D workstation. Intel has not been in the 3D workstation business so an open-source-only strategy works for them (as it did for us until 2002-ish).

    Quote Originally Posted by Figueiredo View Post
    You are probably right about the small closed source module. But I thought that UVD and PM were right there next to HDMI audio in the queue to get approval to release code. Wouldn't in these cases a "big module" be an alternative?
    It wouldn't work for UVD but may be a fallback option for PM. Challenge is that even a big module has a relatively small number of inputs and outputs unless you invest a lot in frustrating reverse engineering efforts and that just seems like a poor use of time if there are alternatives. Note that binary modules are better for hiding "secret software sauce" (eg a spiffy shader compiler) than hiding HW programming info.

    Quote Originally Posted by Figueiredo View Post
    Also, maybe you should point out to the AMD execs that Chromebooks are starting to get traction. Samsung, acer, lenovo and now HP are puting out models, and all of them, with the exeption of samsung with "intel inside". So the argument that OEMs are not requesting linux support is getting weaker by the minute...
    Yep, that has been noticed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Figueiredo View Post
    I don't even get what's the point of AMD being the "cost effective" solution if it comes with the windows license...
    Being "the cost effective solution" is a fallback. Goal is to kick ass and take names

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Rio de Janeiro
    Posts
    201

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    Being "the cost effective solution" is a fallback. Goal is to kick ass and take names
    I like the attitude! I really cheer for you guys. I may be a little harsh, but that's probably because I only buy AMD, so I really the feel the pain. BTW, I just bougth a 7850 and made my brother buy a trinity notebok but we are stuck to windows for now. My brazos netbook runs linux but the experience is so much worse than it could be...

    A little bit offtopic: Does HDMI audio means support for 8 channel LPCM? (that's the only feature I need). Does either frglx or radeon support that?

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,386

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Figueiredo View Post
    A little bit offtopic: Does HDMI audio means support for 8 channel LPCM? (that's the only feature I need). Does either frglx or radeon support that?
    I think the limiting factor right now is the audio driver's ability to generate the bitstream rather than the graphics driver's ability to multiplex the bitstream onto the HDMI audio/video output. Not sure if the graphics driver would be fully ready to handle it but I believe the graphics driver is ahead of the audio driver right now.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    I think the limiting factor right now is the audio driver's ability to generate the bitstream rather than the graphics driver's ability to multiplex the bitstream onto the HDMI audio/video output. Not sure if the graphics driver would be fully ready to handle it but I believe the graphics driver is ahead of the audio driver right now.
    Is there hope for TrueHD or DTS-HD audio eventually?

Posting Permissions

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