Phoronix Forums  

Go Back   Phoronix Forums > Linux Graphics / X.Org Drivers > Intel Linux

Intel Linux Technical support and discussion of the open-source xf86-video-intel driver and other Intel Linux software projects.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-29-2009, 07:40 AM
phoronix phoronix is offline
Phoronix News Bot
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,386
Default Intel Releases New Driver, Kills EXA/DRI1

Phoronix: Intel Releases New Driver, Kills EXA/DRI1

It was just two weeks ago that Intel released its xf86-video-intel 2.7 driver, but there is already a new test release that will lead up to the release of the xf86-video-intel 2.8 series. Normally it is two or three months before a new test release is available for Intel's quarterly Linux graphics driver update, but that is not the case with their Q3'09 stack. Less than a week ago we shared that Intel is looking to drop EXA support in favor of their UMA Acceleration Architecture (UXA) as well as stripping out compatibility for the older DRI1 infrastructure...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=NzIzNQ
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-29-2009, 08:40 AM
wswartzendruber wswartzendruber is offline
Phoronix Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: California, USA
Posts: 115
Default

I'm actually all for this. Why maintain outdated legacy code that doesn't run as efficiently as the newer stuff? Getting rid of DRI1 and EXA should also mean more time diverted into maintaining and fixing DRI2 and UXA.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-29-2009, 09:53 AM
ivanovic ivanovic is offline
Battle For Wesnoth
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 232
Default

I am sure that there are still lots of bugs left in UXA, but probably several of those are not really reported yet. "Forcing" the users to use UXA leads to at least some reporting the bugs which will eventually lead to those bugs being fixed (Devs can only fix what they know is broken!). So yeah, IMO it is a good step to remove the old legacy code even though it will lead to some problems and complaints in the short term.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-29-2009, 09:58 AM
ethana2 ethana2 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: The intarwebs
Posts: 273
Default

Will this driver make it into 9.04 updates?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-29-2009, 10:17 AM
Michael Michael is offline
Phoronix
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 4,716
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ethana2 View Post
Will this driver make it into 9.04 updates?
No, Jaunty is tracking 2.6 series... Not even 2.7. So 2.8 will not make it in.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-29-2009, 10:21 AM
ethana2 ethana2 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: The intarwebs
Posts: 273
Default

Ah. Onward to 9.10 then!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-29-2009, 10:23 AM
nanonyme nanonyme is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Finland
Posts: 848
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivanovic View Post
I am sure that there are still lots of bugs left in UXA, but probably several of those are not really reported yet. "Forcing" the users to use UXA leads to at least some reporting the bugs which will eventually lead to those bugs being fixed (Devs can only fix what they know is broken!).
Devs can also only fix what they have time to fix. Perhaps we have to draw the conclusion that Intel developers have too much time on their hands so they're begging for new things to fix.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-29-2009, 10:23 AM
ethana2 ethana2 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: The intarwebs
Posts: 273
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nanonyme View Post
Devs can also only fix what they have time to fix. Perhaps we have to draw the conclusion that Intel developers have too much time on their hands so they're begging for new things to fix.
That implies some false things. I'd say more like the opposite of that..
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-29-2009, 10:48 AM
nanonyme nanonyme is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Finland
Posts: 848
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ethana2 View Post
That implies some false things. I'd say more like the opposite of that..
Well, if you drop the mostly stable acceleration method (EXA) in favour of a raw acceleration method (UXA), what else would it be than trying to ask people to find you new bugs in raw acceleration method? Thus they want people to file more bugs which implies they want more work. Logical so far? ^^
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-29-2009, 11:47 AM
ethana2 ethana2 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: The intarwebs
Posts: 273
Default

They're dropping an old, buggy acceleration method for a modern and maintainable acceleration method. The whole point of this is to have less bugs to take care of.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2010 by Phoronix Media.