Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMDKFD Looking To Be Merged Into AMDGPU Linux DRM Kernel Driver

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Originally posted by Marc.2377 View Post
    Still IOMMUv2 is a requirement for HSA because of PCIe atomic operations, correct? I was once considering whether this could be "compensated" for in drivers, but former AMD employee and IOMMU contributor Joerg Roedel told me that wasn't an option.
    That's a tricky question to answer. IIRC on Kaveri (and maybe Carrizo) the same HW block implemented platform atomics and the address translation cache (ATC) used for accessing memory through IOMMUv2, so the two had to be used together.

    On dGPUs we limit use of atomics to the optional PCIE atomic operations (HSA platform atomics support ~8 operations while PCIE atomics only support 3) and IOMMUv2 is not required. We had hoped to be able to standardize on IOMMUv2 for system memory accesses but AFAIK Intel ended up only exposing their IOMMUv2 functionality to the integrated GPU and not to the PCIE connectors.

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by bridgman View Post
      Hey... focus !!
      You asked about GPUs; I answered about GPUs.

      There is more interest on the CPU side, although none of that seems to have made it to large/corporate customers or OEMs yet..
      I think there is not more interest on the CPU side it is just the simple fact that on the CPU side the people start voting with their feet. in my point of view there is equal interest on the GPU side but right now people can not vote with their feet.

      But maybe this time will soon be over you maybe want to google this graphic card: Lincom GP101 from the company: China Shipbuilding Industry Corporation (CSIC)
      Phantom circuit Sequence Reducer Dyslexia

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
        I think there is not more interest on the CPU side it is just the simple fact that on the CPU side the people start voting with their feet. in my point of view there is equal interest on the GPU side but right now people can not vote with their feet.
        Not sure I agree - GPU "interest" is artificially inflated by the fact that CPUs have a built-in copy of microcode that you can run with if you don't care about security and correctness updates while GPUs won't run at all.

        Libre distro users feel a lot more immediate pain on the GPU side, but while in theory the issue is about open source microcode in practice the decisions they make turn into "built in binary microcode" vs "binary microcode from a file" which I think you would agree is a different thing.

        The decisions are defended by saying "oh it's all about whether you can change it or not" but if that were the case then locking down the microcode versions and confirming that with hashes would be sufficient to make microcode from a file equivalent to microcode from a ROM or flash
        Last edited by bridgman; 07-08-2018, 08:26 PM.

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by bridgman View Post

          Not sure I agree - GPU "interest" is artificially inflated by the fact that CPUs have a built-in copy of microcode that you can run with if you don't care about security and correctness updates while GPUs won't run at all.

          Libre distro users feel a lot more immediate pain on the GPU side, but while in theory the issue is about open source microcode in practice the decisions they make turn into "built in binary microcode" vs "binary microcode from a file" which I think you would agree is a different thing.
          The decisions are defended by saying "oh it's all about whether you can change it or not" but if that were the case then locking down the microcode versions and confirming that with hashes would be sufficient to make microcode from a file equivalent to microcode from a ROM or flash
          I agree with you on this point people should NOT be interested in a GPU who has "built in binary microcode" only because a Libre distro is in conflict with a "binary microcode from a file" because "binary microcode from a file" really has the benefit of "security and correctness updates".

          "The decisions are defended by saying "oh it's all about whether you can change it or not"

          Really it is fully right and correct to say something you can not change is in fact hardware... and not software .
          FSF/Richard Stallmann is in fact fully right at this point.

          But I also agree with you that this is not a good argument against a company who do this: "locking down the microcode versions and confirming that with hashes would be sufficient to make microcode from a file equivalent to microcode from a ROM or flash"

          People really do in fact fail here to communicate with Corporatism companies...

          Because i fully Agree with you on this point:

          fully Open-Source GPU really should be about this: ""fully auditable hardware""

          But how can we switch the failing commucations about open-source-microcode GPU into a really healthy communication about
          fully auditable hardware?

          The most easy way would be if AMD makes a roadmap for this "NEW" market and really start with a Compute(compute Vulkan-style only API) only card and then later add more features what the real buying customers want.

          ""fully auditable hardware"" really should be a selling point in the high security data center market.
          Phantom circuit Sequence Reducer Dyslexia

          Comment


          • #45
            Agree with everything you said. The only fly in the ointment is that today large data center customers sometimes are able to audit the hardware (I expect that includes microcode) since they have strong incentives (both reputation and financial) to protect whatever secrets they are exposed to, while there is no similar mechanism for individuals today other than open sourcing.

            The consequence of that is less pressure than you would expect from large data center customers for open sourcing or publicly available audit reports, since *they* already have the information they need. I don't have a good answer for that yet.

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by bridgman View Post
              Agree with everything you said. The only fly in the ointment is that today large data center customers sometimes are able to audit the hardware (I expect that includes microcode) since they have strong incentives (both reputation and financial) to protect whatever secrets they are exposed to, while there is no similar mechanism for individuals today other than open sourcing.

              The consequence of that is less pressure than you would expect from large data center customers for open sourcing or publicly available audit reports, since *they* already have the information they need. I don't have a good answer for that yet.
              so your point is: as long as the big corporatism monopole customers who have the resources to check the microcode internally are fine with AMD hardware the smaller non-monopole competitors and private persons does not matter to AMD?

              this really sound like we really need a strong government(Donald Trump Re-Election) who do the dirty work of Cutting these big companies down into little pieces to make sure no one do have the size and resources to be that big to be able to check the microcode internally and amd/intel also should not be that big to force politics like this on the market.
              Phantom circuit Sequence Reducer Dyslexia

              Comment


              • #47
                Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                so your point is: as long as the big corporatism monopole customers who have the resources to check the microcode internally are fine with AMD hardware the smaller non-monopole competitors and private persons does not matter to AMD?
                No, my point is what I actually said. Please try not to be this guy:

                http://dilbert.com/strip/2015-06-07

                You said that you expected large datacenter customers would be pushing for fully auditable hardware and that their influence would help everyone else - I responded and said "not as much as you expect, and here's why". That's it.

                Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                this really sound like we really need a strong government(Donald Trump Re-Election) who do the dirty work of Cutting these big companies down into little pieces to make sure no one do have the size and resources to be that big to be able to check the microcode internally and amd/intel also should not be that big to force politics like this on the market.
                Yeah, between "a few large datacenter companies" and "a few large OEMs" it is a highly concentrated market.

                Remember that Intel is about 12x our size - if we were big enough to force politics on the market the way you are implying I think you would be happier with the state of the market.
                Last edited by bridgman; 07-10-2018, 01:33 AM.

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by bridgman View Post

                  No, my point is what I actually said. Please try not to be this guy:

                  http://dilbert.com/strip/2015-06-07

                  You said that you expected large datacenter customers would be pushing for fully auditable hardware and that their influence would help everyone else - I responded and said "not as much as you expect, and here's why". That's it.

                  Yeah, between "a few large datacenter companies" and "a few large OEMs" it is a highly concentrated market.

                  Remember that Intel is about 12x our size - if we were big enough to force politics on the market the way you are implying I think you would be happier with the state of the market.
                  I get the Point: resistance is futile
                  Phantom circuit Sequence Reducer Dyslexia

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    No, but misdirection and baiting are going to be futile whenever I am paying attention

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Q and B can turn every thread into a discussion about binary only microcode ;-)

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X