Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Catalyst 11.8 Linux Driver Released

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

  • phoronix
    started a topic AMD Catalyst 11.8 Linux Driver Released

    AMD Catalyst 11.8 Linux Driver Released

    Phoronix: AMD Catalyst 11.8 Linux Driver Released

    While LinuxCon 2011 just started in Vancouver, Canada, the AMD developers over in Toronto have released their monthly Catalyst Linux driver update. Catalyst 11.8 Linux driver is now available for those who want this binary blob for Radeon/FirePro graphics processors...

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

  • b15hop
    replied
    Originally posted by Smask View Post
    Spambot following a spambot
    I'm not sure I understand what you're on about?

    Leave a comment:


  • Smask
    replied
    Spambot following a spambot

    Leave a comment:


  • schnelle
    replied
    tear free works!

    Tear free works on my mobility radeon hd 2400 with 128mb. I didn't expect that from my weak card. Xv video, kwin effects, flash etc everything works great! Yay!

    Leave a comment:


  • b15hop
    replied
    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    We did make it happen.

    Now you are asking if we can take the open source drivers back from the community, make them "AMD official", and spend a big pile of new money funding open source driver development with a goal of matching the performance and functionality of the proprietary drivers, right ?

    Whatever happened to people asking for things like "world peace" ?
    Sounds like world peace is easier. Truth is though: Can't please them all...
    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    Cool, so many things I disagree with in a single post



    That's not a radeon vs nouveau thing as much as a hardware thing -- the fact that AMD GPUs keep pretty much all of their microcode in RAM while other vendors build most of it into the chip. If our microcode was burned into the chip where you couldn't see it would we somehow be more "open source friendly" ?

    I see the same thing with CPUs -- processors which don't have upgradable microcode are somehow felt to be "more open source friendly" than processors where you can update the microcode after purchase. This whole "if we have to see the microcode it's evil but if it's out of sight it's OK" perspective baffles me -- it's like the belief that building a wall around a resort so you can't see the poor people outside somehow makes the problem go away.
    I laughed loudly after reading this one. x) Walls are for either keeping things in or out.

    Leave a comment:


  • crazycheese
    replied
    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    We did make it happen.

    Now you are asking if we can take the open source drivers back from the community, make them "AMD official", and spend a big pile of new money funding open source driver development with a goal of matching the performance and functionality of the proprietary drivers, right ?

    Whatever happened to people asking for things like "world peace" ?
    I?m asking if you can make them "AMD official", and allow people to spend their money funding open source driver development (using transparent system) with a goal of matching the performance and functionality of the proprietary drivers.

    I don?t know what happened to them. But should radeon match nvidia blob in performance/features even close and should it be backed up seriously by your company, same as catalyst now; hardly anyone will buy nvidia for linux market. Small ever increasing linux gaming market.

    Leave a comment:


  • bridgman
    replied
    Can't argue with that, I guess...

    Leave a comment:


  • mirv
    replied
    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    We did make it happen.

    Now you are asking if we can take the open source drivers back from the community, make them "AMD official", and spend a big pile of new money funding open source driver development with a goal of matching the performance and functionality of the proprietary drivers, right ?

    Whatever happened to people asking for things like "world peace" ?
    People thought they should set their goals higher.

    Leave a comment:


  • bridgman
    replied
    Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
    So, if you wanted opensource, you would make it happen. But instead we watch the clouds passing by.
    We did make it happen.

    Now you are asking if we can take the open source drivers back from the community, make them "AMD official", and spend a big pile of new money funding open source driver development with a goal of matching the performance and functionality of the proprietary drivers, right ?

    Whatever happened to people asking for things like "world peace" ?
    Last edited by bridgman; 09-08-2011, 01:48 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • crazycheese
    replied
    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    That's not a radeon vs nouveau thing as much as a hardware thing -- the fact that AMD GPUs keep pretty much all of their microcode in RAM while other vendors build most of it into the chip. If our microcode was burned into the chip where you couldn't see it would we somehow be more "open source friendly" ?
    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...item&px=OTQ4NA
    Nouveau has less to mess with microcode and blob loading. All three major graphics providers utilize proprietary hardware design, so .. less is more. Next step is uncloak microcode source, which is not to happen for both, so nouveau(not nvidia) wins as it does not have to inject blobs into memory. Nouveau?s walls are a bit more distanced.

    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    I see the same thing with CPUs -- processors which don't have upgradable microcode are somehow felt to be "more open source friendly" than processors where you can update the microcode after purchase. This whole "if we have to see the microcode it's evil but if it's out of sight it's OK" perspective baffles me -- it's like the belief that building a wall around a resort so you can't see the poor people outside somehow makes the problem go away.
    First step to freedom is open application, second are open libraries, kernel and drivers, third - open hardware. Hardware?s bits and bytes are not referred as application due to it performing mostly technical low-level stuff normally not exceeding the level of the hardware part where it seats. This is why microcode in flashrom is referred much more to hardware functionality that doing same in driver. Sure, you load microcode on each boot, were others have it in ROM. Were there any microcode based keyboard keyloggers/spyware/viruses written so far? A driver that loads something closed source in memory on each boot..

    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    Why would you even think this ? The only thing we have said w.r.t. performance is that BASED ON THE COMPLEXITY OF THE HARDWARE, THE SIZE OF THE COMMUNITY, AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPER STATEMENTS ABOUT THE TYPES OF OPTIMIZATIONS THEY WOULD AND WOULD NOT DO we expected the open drivers to run with approximately 60-70% of the fglrx driver's performance. I think it's fair to say that we would be ecstatic if the open source driver eliminated the need for fglrx in markets like workstation, but it seems unlikely given the magnitude of the task.
    Drivers are rather complex and they must adapt quickly to newer models/libraries which means it requires huge driving force. Driving force that may be achieved by:
    a) every single AMD card buyer hacking your card for better drivers
    b) a split of payment you get from each AMD card buyer when he purchases the card
    So, if you wanted opensource, you would make it happen. But instead we watch the clouds passing by.
    Was microsoft also watching clouds when they formed monopoly? Regarding the size of the market... I?m sure they were planning its future size, not current. Cause currently there were just clouds

    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    When we don't release info it's because of IP or DRM reasons, certainly not a desire to hold back the open source driver.
    Seriously, I hold it for not probable for AMD to create its windows driver and not tracking IP they use; solely refering to fglrx obfuscator to blend everything just no one notes. I mean, when I buy the card and install the driver, I?m not instantly sued by AMD?s 3rd party companies for using that driver. So obfuscation works?
    This whole IP thing, recognized only in US and banned in New Zealand, works and spins if major players accept it. So, unless AMD does something about it (like Google), the opensource driver would be a beef tenderloin of code remnants. Something what surely won?t support the card possibilities in the matter of assuring the paying customer to pick your card from the shelves of hardware store.
    The impression I got from our smalltalk was that AMD is completely ok with current situation, which I?m not, so...


    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    This is totally untrue. I said a couple of things, none of them even remotely close to your statement :
    1. if we put a mechanism in place to allocate development funds between proprietary and open source drivers based on the money we made from the two markets there was a serious chance that the outcome would be *less* funding for open source, not *more*
    2. even if the numbers worked out in favour of shifting relatively more funding to the open drivers at some point in the future I don't think we could afford to substantially reduce fglrx funding relative to the requirements of the markets it serves, so this really boils down to a "give me more money" request
    1. I?m very sure that the most expensive car(card, space rocket, coffee bean, diamond,software) is the most polished one - in terms that >justify its price<. Not the one that is of blackbox or glass-clean design. Actually glass-clean design adds to the point that people know its nanometals(silicon particles, hull plating, structure, carats, bits) ain?t glued from bio-waste. So, there is no sense to sell open driver, unless you want it yourself and probably no one is going to push it forward except yourself. Of course community support of improves this. So you are perfectly ok with current situation, which forces me to use closed driver. Im glad you cannot force me to use windows, thanks at least for that
    2. Your customers will appreciate open drivers, thats very sure. If they are on paar functionality with closed ones. I don?t know any case, where customer will prefer closed driver to equal quality open one.

    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    If we were happy with current state why would we have been working for years to bring open source driver support earlier in time and closer to hardware launch ? Why would we be working to release programming info in more areas ?
    "We" are barely enough to handle the complexity, which requires some financial model; otherwise "We" are perfect.

    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    If we were happy with current development rate why would we be hiring more developers ?
    So, you sure you will be able to provide sameday support like catalyst for hd8k? So, that people could go out to shops, pick card up, insert it and enjoy?

    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    How can you possibly twist a performance estimate based on the size of the development team relative to the domain complexity into a claim that "we are happy with driver performance" ?
    The devil is in details. The devil means completeness, power, efficiency.
    Fglrx has much more details and I don?t think whole 2k crew is drinking beer (maybe wrong beer? ) so fglrx still has bugs with each release. I think, 2k people actually only help correct specific workstation bugs from firegl customers, but, although I do not use AMD cards now, I see fglrx gets more and more in form... To the point when there will be no difference between proprietary nvidia and proprietary amd.

    You claim you can reach 70% speed of highly detailed supercar(sorry! :P) assembled by 2k people with car which, assembled by 10 people with help of neighbourhood from household objects. While I never argumented with this "less is a bit less from more" strategy, I seriously question you can win championships in f1 made form household parts. I wonder where will my money go when I purchase AMD card again.. best possibility is fglrx. The car you are racing against. Or together against nvidia.

    So, my opinion is: fglrx tries to match nvidia driver; opensource radeon tries to match... erm,.. nouveau driver. Everyone is happy, except me :/
    Oh well, maybe I should put a test drive of proprietary blobs, ie gods at some much later time. I don?t think fglrx will loose to opensource radeon; and I know the reason, which you probably know too, but call it miracle twist. Oh well


    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    Can I ask a favour ? When you make claims like this please quote the statements where you think we said those things. I expect that will help both of us
    Sure, but statements not always transfer the exact meaning, especially over internet. I think even when speaking directly, there is place for missunderstanding. But sure.
    Last edited by crazycheese; 09-08-2011, 12:55 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X