Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ATI, please release an Open UVD API

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

  • markg85
    started a topic ATI, please release an Open UVD API

    ATI, please release an Open UVD API

    Hi,

    from time to time i give ATI some rants because they totally deserve it for making (lets stay polite this time) not perfect video card drivers in linux. However the recent developments in the open source ATI drivers are suddenly shooting up so i think it's that time again to beg for something that ATI still hasn't made available yet.

    So, ATI, why don't you release a API to make use of UVD? That way you can keep all the secrets and still unleash the power of UVD in Linux. The Linux community will likely pick it up and make vaapi implementations which in turn can then be used in players like mplayer, xine and what not.

    I'm asking this because ATI is even actively promoting it's new features, but we all know they are not available on Linux at all! The little deal you have with splitted-desktop-systems is nice and does help to get some UVD stuff in linux, but it would be far better if you just release an API to make use of all of UVD's power.

    2 links for ATI's UVD promoting in slides:



    btw, confidential? NDA? you ATI guys should check the ones you give your slides to.. they are all over the web right now (not that i mind it).

    The bigger picture
    There is a bigger picture in this (not talking about the above images). You know there is a little thing in Linux called "VA API"? That little thing isn't much of a success right now because there is only one vendor making it possible to make a vaapi implementation: nvidia! There is a closed source vaapi lib for ati, but that's sadly far from being perfect.

    I know this motivation has been brought up more then once but i do it again anyway. nvidia is able to give a API to let users make a vaapi lib, so why can't AMD/ATI do that as well? In theory (if you look at how open ATI is with linux) they should be more then willing to provide it so i just don't get why they didn't do that yet... Does there really needs to be a company that asks it from ati along with a big bag of money?

    Here is a BIG advantage when both nvidia and ati (as the 2 biggest GPU manufactures) have a fully functional vaapi lib that is reliable: other software devs can then start to use vaapi to get hardware accelerated decoding! For example flash (how much i hate it sucking up my cpu), the oss flash alternatives, all media players out there for linux and it would greatly improve the linux graphic experience since most users simply often do things video related (browsing youtube for example).

    So, again. Please make a UVD API available that allows the linux community to develop vaapi drivers. It would be best if this UVD API would also be usable for the open source ATI alternative drivers, but i can imagine that being a lot more difficult then making an API available through the catalyst driver.

    Last but not least. I want to mail this to all ATI persons remotely connected to this issue to let them know it _is_ an issue. I'm searching for one person's email in perticulair: "Dirk Meyer" AMD CEO. I want him to read this and finally get some speed in this (hopefully he likes linux), but i haven't found his email address yet.. if someone could pm that to me?

    I was nice this time right? ^_^
    Just wait and see how my post is when i get a 6870 card and find out that it doesn't work ^_^

  • markg85
    replied
    Hmm, i can remember that as well. I might be confusing things a bit now.

    Leave a comment:


  • bridgman
    replied
    Are you sure those were API issues ?

    I remember the discussion about *implementation* issues (specifically the function that put the decoded image into a form that could be used by OpenGL wasn't working) but I don't remember any discussion saying that the API itself would need to change.

    gbeauche's recent post mentioned *API* issues, implying that if we released the current API it would need to change anyways. I don't remember seeing discussion about API issues before.

    Leave a comment:


  • markg85
    replied
    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    Is Tim aware of the API issues ? If so I can hook up with him. I had been trying to get the API opened up in its current form.
    Bridgman, sorry to say this, but gbeauche told you about serious API issues before in some other post.. didn't you do anything with that? (i don't know where that post is, but you replied on it although i doubt you want to go through all your post history )

    Leave a comment:


  • bridgman
    replied
    Originally posted by gbeauche View Post
    I doubt it as there are still two API design flaws that prevent it from being useful without using awful workarounds (or luck).
    Is Tim aware of the API issues ? If so I can hook up with him. I had been trying to get the API opened up in its current form.

    Leave a comment:


  • markg85
    replied
    droidhacker and jimbo please go back on topic.
    Thanx.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jimbo
    replied
    Of course, I better trust your word than anandtech.

    Leave a comment:


  • droidhacker
    replied
    Originally posted by Jimbo View Post
    Anandtech had a preview of a sandy bridge chip on august, keep in mind that this is not final hardware, but I guess the hardware is not going to change much, and there are not final drivers.

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/t...ins-in-a-row/7

    For video acceleration part, the previous gpu integrated on core i5-i3, intel HD, has support on linux for mpeg2 and h264.
    DO NOT bother trying to prove any kind of point using benchmarks. Benchmarks can be made to prove anything. I can give you benchmarks showing an 8086 blowing the doors off an i7. Totally meaningless.

    Leave a comment:


  • gbeauche
    replied
    Originally posted by markg85 View Post
    So the neat deinterlacing IS in the XvBA API!
    No, it's not. Those functions are mid to low-level and shared verbatim with the Windows components. However, they are not exposed to XvBA API.

    If someone that's a bit more knowledgeable then me regarding pulling a .so file apart, please do so! I do seriously wonder if it's possible to reconstruct the header file.. I haven't found anything yet.
    You can try but good luck! Have fun. If you know how depressive I can be with that pile of "stuff" with the API in hands...

    Leave a comment:


  • gbeauche
    replied
    Originally posted by evolution View Post
    About the subject: I'd prefer to have a proprietary yet functional UVD API with H264, VC-1 and MPEG-2 decoding, (similar to what nVidia actually provides us (with VDPAU)) than an Open-Source implementation that could be risky to be implemented, due to patent infringing (personally, I hate patents). So, I think the best way to provide us an "Open UVD API", would be, instead of releasing the UVD API to the open-source community, use the graphics card shader capabilities to decode H264, VC-1, MPEG-2 formats on hardware...
    I am sorry but those two sentences contradict themselves. Note that the very reason why Fedora people didn't want to include libva initially was because it did contain an Open Source driver (G45) for MPEG-2 and H.264 using shaders (+ BSD for the later). And thus, was suggested to be a potential risk vs. patents. Debian people didn't seem to have similar concerns though.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X