Page 1 of 16 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 159

Thread: AMD Is Exploring A Very Interesting, More-Open Linux Driver Strategy

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,388

    Default AMD Is Exploring A Very Interesting, More-Open Linux Driver Strategy

    Phoronix: AMD Is Exploring A Very Interesting, More-Open Linux Driver Strategy

    This week I was out at the Game Developer's Conference not with a focus on games but to learn about some changes they AMD currently pursuing for their Linux driver model. If this new Linux driver model goes through, the Catalyst Linux driver will be more open, but it's not without some risk. Read more in this Phoronix exclusive story.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=20050

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    818

    Default

    Great story! That's what I'm looking for when checking out Phoronix every day.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,440

    Default

    This is some really interesting news, and not something I expected at all. I think it sounds like a pretty good plan, though honestly I think it'd be perfectly fine to make the FOSS drivers keep up with catalyst and then just ditch catalyst altogether.

    I'm really happy AMD is putting this much attention and effort into Linux. They'll eventually become the most recommendable graphics solution if they keep it up.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,162

    Default

    Personally, I think that most of Michael's concerns are not as problematic as it sounds like, and that this approach is very much doable (and beneficial due to no more duplication of work and the merge of existing features in both kernel drivers).

    Really exciting stuff.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    130

    Thumbs up

    Excellent article Michael!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    172

    Default

    In the interest of transparency, AMD sponsored the Phoronix trip to GDC 2014 in order to meet-up and talk about their Linux plans.
    AMD dont give cards (hopefully in future send cards as nvidia) but help with your trip cost, very impressive AMD

    Hopefully AMD continues put attention on phoronix

    Good article

    Last edited by pinguinpc; 03-22-2014 at 01:06 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pinguinpc View Post
    AMD dont give cards...
    In fairness, we did send a Kaveri system. Not a "card" technically, but it is hardware

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Old Europe
    Posts
    932

    Default

    Great article, Michael!

    This comes totally unexpected, indeed.

    Besides the risks, this sounds exciting! I just love people and companies
    that are brave enough to rethink their previously made decisions.
    AMD were among the first to release detailed (and useful) programming
    docs for GPUs and this might be another groundbreaking thing.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    168

    Default

    If they manage to do that, it would be great.

    They would benefit from recent and incoming features to the Radeon DRM kernel driver: Primes fds, dma-buf fences, etc.
    And it would become much easier for Wayland support.

    Also I think it would be easier for them to have enduro support like on Windows.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    In fairness, we did send a Kaveri system. Not a "card" technically, but it is hardware
    bridgman - I figure you have a unique perspective due to having worked with the open source driver for quite a while. How do you feel about this development? What are your thoughts on having a Catalyst user space interacting with the open source radeon DRM?

    One of the things I took from the article it sounds like Michael had concerns in AMD possibly needing to rework parts of the DRM component of the open source driver to interact with Catalyst down the track and this potentially being an issue being accepted upstream if changes become extensive. Do you think this could be an issue?

    Any other comments on the article?

Posting Permissions

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