GLAMOR Continues Advancing Greatly, Getting Faster

[phoronix]

Phoronix: GLAMOR Continues Advancing Greatly, Getting Faster

GLAMOR continues advancing for carrying out 2D X.Org acceleration via OpenGL...

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

[Micket]

I have never really cared much about the news regarding 2D performance..
But, I recently bought a replacement radeon card, found out the radeon driver in Debian Sid was to outdated, and I had to use the closed source version.
Holy shit.. the 2D performance is atrocious.. Like 1 second lags before stuff is redrawn when changing virtual desktops (in Awesome WM)
Scrolling in firefox slows to a fucking crawl.. had to turn off smooth scrolling becuase it took forever to get down to the bottom. Scrolling in firefox, i probably get about 1FPS.
3D performance is good though (as far as I've been able to push it).

I just don't want to bother to compile thing myself, so I'm angrily just waiting for new packages.

[przemoli]

I have never really cared much about the news regarding 2D performance..
But, I recently bought a replacement radeon card, found out the radeon driver in Debian Sid was to outdated, and I had to use the closed source version.
Holy shit.. the 2D performance is atrocious.. Like 1 second lags before stuff is redrawn when changing virtual desktops (in Awesome WM)
Scrolling in firefox slows to a fucking crawl.. had to turn off smooth scrolling becuase it took forever to get down to the bottom. Scrolling in firefox, i probably get about 1FPS.
3D performance is good though (as far as I've been able to push it).

I just don't want to bother to compile thing myself, so I'm angrily just waiting for new packages.

Those changes wont improve Catalyst situation. (As Catalyst do their own 2D work)

However I dunno why AMD wont use just GLAMOR in Catalyst. Even unoptimized GLAMOR can not be slower than what Catalyst have right?

[AJenbo]

Does any one know what the OpenGL requirements are for GLAMOR?

Those changes wont improve Catalyst situation. (As Catalyst do their own 2D work)

However I dunno why AMD wont use just GLAMOR in Catalyst. Even unoptimized GLAMOR can not be slower than what Catalyst have right?

I guess if you run Xorg inside Xorg it should be using GLAMOR as acceleration, if not there is a more direct way to force it.

[Micket]

Those changes wont improve Catalyst situation. (As Catalyst do their own 2D work)

However I dunno why AMD wont use just GLAMOR in Catalyst. Even unoptimized GLAMOR can not be slower than what Catalyst have right?

I'm only using catalyst because the open source drivers in debian were to old.

[Ericg]

I'm only using catalyst because the open source drivers in debian were to old.

Selectively pull in from Testing? Just an option

[Micket]

Selectively pull in from Testing? Just an option

I'm already running debian sid. Still to old.

[dungeon]

Does any one know what the OpenGL requirements are for GLAMOR?

It is OpenGL 1.3 at a very minimum (on paper it can be implemented for ALL cards currently supportded by mesa also, but will be mostly unaccelerated on cards without shaders - acceleration of gradients, trapezods, xv, etc they are all done via shaders...) So for usable glamor, card needs GLSL support and to be at full OpenGL 2.0+ level .

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/glamor/plain/src/glamor.c

[dungeon]

I'm already running debian sid. Still to old.

Debian do not want to support that "nasty" glamor lib right now , it will support glamor as part of xserver... That will be xserver 1.16 to go :cool.

[AJenbo]

It is OpenGL 1.3 at a very minimum (on paper it can be implemented for ALL cards currently supportded by mesa also, but will be mostly unaccelerated on cards without shaders - acceleration of gradients, trapezods, xv, etc they are all done via shaders...) So for usable glamor, card needs GLSL support and to be at full OpenGL 2.0+ level .

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/dri...n/src/glamor.c

Cool, thanks for the info.