Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 28

Thread: Do Devs play games or test what they do ?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    75

    Default Do Devs play games or test what they do ?

    Im running

    x.server x.org 1.7.2.0
    Kernal 3.13
    and Mesa 9.2

    I have noticed On Mesa 10.1 and above adding AA to source engine games slows the framerate to unplayable. Also On Mesa 10.1 the overal FPS is higher than 9.2 but it is not as smooth by far, also 10.2 is even worse.

    So the question I have is how can one make a change that ruins a game such as a source engine game and not actually play test to see if that was a positive change? It seems like a chef not tasting the stew before serving.

    So at the moment, I wont run Oibaf or Edgers just incase it screws the performance up, but i would like some Opengl support for newer games.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,103

    Default

    I will have to ask: what do you think makes Source special. Sure, it's important to you, but what should make it important to dev foo?

    inb4 it's popular. By that argument everyone would have to test (and buy!) the top 10 games each year, including such shining examples as Minecraft or WoW.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    I will have to ask: what do you think makes Source special. Sure, it's important to you, but what should make it important to dev foo?

    inb4 it's popular. By that argument everyone would have to test (and buy!) the top 10 games each year, including such shining examples as Minecraft or WoW.
    I dont see a problem with that argument. It's not totally out of the question to test your work it happens in all industries.

    now, do they test against a benchmark when complied at all? if not then there litterally is no testing other than a basic soak test. Which is appaling.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    75

    Default

    noticed that is it actually the X.org Edgers PPA that slows down performance lots.

    1.7.2.0 is fine, 1.7.3.0 is slow and chuggy.

    anyone going to test and fix?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,371

    Default

    We try and test as many cases as possible, but we can't test every combination of hw, apps, distros, kernels, drivers, and libs. If you are having a particular problem or notice a regression, please report a bug (https://bugs.freedesktop.org).

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by agd5f View Post
    We try and test as many cases as possible, but we can't test every combination of hw, apps, distros, kernels, drivers, and libs. If you are having a particular problem or notice a regression, please report a bug (https://bugs.freedesktop.org).
    for some reason even though i havent added a PPA i have now noticed a large frame drop and stuttering. So i checked

    glxinfo | grep "OpenGL version"

    and it was 10.2 again

    before this it was butter smooth on 9.2

    What's the easiest way to regress to 9.2 again please? All source 1 and source 2 engine games are effected.

    Also, i wont report a bug, it should be plain as day when the main games for testing TF2 (even phoronix has a TF2 benchmark) L4D2 et al.. are going much slower with 10.2. Why should I bother when 9/1000 i get no response for months and then smooth, and then slow and then smooth and then slow

    10.2 =
    10.3 =
    10.4 =
    10.5 =

    etc...

    this has happened for quite a number of years. It's the reason Canoical and Valve are taking their own approach and release schedules to stuff as there is no quality control in the opensource world. Excusing a few dev's who care and Torvalds.

    So what is the easiest way to go back to 9.2 please..

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,458

    Default

    AFAIK 10.2 is not released so you would only be able to get testing builds -- if you are seeing problems in 10.2 that don't have existing clear bug tickets then it is really important to get one in -- every combination of hardware & distro is going to behave slightly differently, so it's not uncommon for a change to improve behavior on hardware the developer owns but cause problems on another hardware/software combination.

    One of the huge benefits of open source development is that users do have real-time access to the tips of development branches (this is what oibaf and xorg-edgers builds give you) so users can test on a wide range of configurations and report bugs before the code is released.

    The best way to downgrade depends on how you upgraded in the first place. You mentioned that you are not using the oibaf or xorg-edgers testing repositories -- how did you get from mesa 9.2 to 10.1 / 10.2 ? Did you build from source (in which case the best approach is probably to delete/rename the files you built and then remove/re-install the corresponding packages from the original distribution) or upgrade from a PPA ? You seemed to be surprised that your version was 10.2 so that suggests you may be getting them from a PPA.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    AFAIK 10.2 is not released so you would only be able to get testing builds -- if you are seeing problems in 10.2 that don't have existing clear bug tickets then it is really important to get one in -- every combination of hardware & distro is going to behave slightly differently, so it's not uncommon for a change to improve behavior on hardware the developer owns but cause problems on another hardware/software combination.

    One of the huge benefits of open source development is that users do have real-time access to the tips of development branches (this is what oibaf and xorg-edgers builds give you) so users can test on a wide range of configurations and report bugs before the code is released.

    The best way to downgrade depends on how you upgraded in the first place. You mentioned that you are not using the oibaf or xorg-edgers testing repositories -- how did you get from mesa 9.2 to 10.1 / 10.2 ? Did you build from source (in which case the best approach is probably to delete/rename the files you built and then remove/re-install the corresponding packages from the original distribution) or upgrade from a PPA ? You seemed to be surprised that your version was 10.2 so that suggests you may be getting them from a PPA.
    Thanks for the reply.

    The drivers were out of the box for Mint 16 Cinnamon.

    I am running a very standard AMD opensource setup with no funnies. I must confess somewhere along a 10.1 release it got worse and carried on into 10.2

    I wouldnt even know how to begin bug hunting when technically its just slow performance. Im sure its openGL related though.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,458

    Default

    When you say "the drivers were out of the box" are you talking about Mesa 9.2 or the more recent ones ? My impression was that Mint 16 shipped with a 3.11 kernel and 9.2 Mesa but you seem to have a newer kernel as well as newer Mesa, and Mint doesn't seem to be particularly aggressive in terms of driver updates.

    The Mint Debian version (based on Debian testing) seems to have a newer kernel but it's still not obvious to me where you could be getting 10.2 Mesa from if you don't have a testing PPA enabled somehow...
    Last edited by bridgman; 04-06-2014 at 01:04 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    206

    Default

    hyperz was disabled in 10.2, did you enable it? you have to set a environment var:
    Code:
    R600_DEBUG=hyperz

Posting Permissions

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