Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

More Intel Driver Code Merged Into DRM-Next For Linux 4.2 Kernel

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

  • More Intel Driver Code Merged Into DRM-Next For Linux 4.2 Kernel

    Phoronix: More Intel Driver Code Merged Into DRM-Next For Linux 4.2 Kernel

    David Airlie has pulled Intel's latest batch of changes into DRM-Next that they've been queuing up for merging into the Linux 4.2 kernel...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...M-Next-May-4.2

  • #2
    This is why I love Intel

    As a matter of fact my next laptop won't have any dedicated gpu since both nvidia and amd are assholes

    I hope in a few years Intel will have powerful enough gpus so I can move away completely even on desktop

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Danny3 View Post
      As a matter of fact my next laptop won't have any dedicated gpu since both nvidia and amd are assholes
      I'm probably going to regret this, but.... why are we in your list ?

      Comment


      • #4
        Because you are competitor bridgman . Probably that is in human black and white nature that following keyword about one object cause another object to be marked as asshole .

        Originally posted by Danny3 View Post
        This is why I love Intel
        That is it, if you said i love something then you also need to hate something too, otherwise first statement does not make sense

        Comment


        • #5
          I use Intel graphics on my Haswell i5 laptop, and I'm looking forward to getting a Skylake laptop with significantly better graphics in the next year or so. But on my desktop with 3 monitors and doing a bit of gaming, I'm going to need a discrete graphics card for a long time to come. AMD's support for open-source is way ahead of Nvidia's. So personally I think they deserve our support.
          Last edited by Rich Oliver; 19 May 2015, 11:48 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by bridgman View Post

            I'm probably going to regret this, but.... why are we in your list ?
            Don't you have 2 drivers, one open source and one closed source?
            This is what i understood reading some articles
            http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...apu_1310&num=1
            http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ri_omega&num=1
            And other
            If this is correct your resources are split in 2 and the open source one will suffer from this
            Intel on the other hand invests only in the open source one
            Please tell me if I'm wrong

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Danny3 View Post

              Don't you have 2 drivers, one open source and one closed source?
              This is what i understood reading some articles
              http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...apu_1310&num=1
              http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ri_omega&num=1
              And other
              If this is correct your resources are split in 2 and the open source one will suffer from this
              Intel on the other hand invests only in the open source one
              Please tell me if I'm wrong
              Look at Bridgeman. I mean really look at him. Look him in the eyes and tell him that you hate him. How cruel can you be.

              To be serious, your comments about open and closed drivers being a resource split are only slightly true, especially considering the effort to reduce the separation that is coming in with the AMDGPU (sharing kernel, DRM and X code between all drivers.) The closed-source driver is actually shared effort with the Windows team, so if anything the linux driver is siphoning resources away from a bigger team.
              If you want to complain about the AMD drivers it's better to target stability issues, and GL compliance.

              Also APU and Kaveri articles are usually talking about CPU (or combo PUs.)

              [I don't work for AMD, nor am I in anyway a decent developer, so I could very likely be wrong.]

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Danny3 View Post
                If this is correct your resources are split in 2 and the open source one will suffer from this
                Intel on the other hand invests only in the open source one
                Actually Intel have closed source userspace driver for Android that present on all devices.
                Though it's run on top of same open source kernel driver and it's what AMD moving towards to now.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Danny3 View Post
                  Don't you have 2 drivers, one open source and one closed source?
                  ...
                  If this is correct your resources are split in 2 and the open source one will suffer from this
                  Intel on the other hand invests only in the open source one
                  Please tell me if I'm wrong
                  Yeah, I think you're wrong for a couple of reasons. First, Intel doesn't compete in the high end 3D graphics workstation market, and that's the market that Catalyst is written for. Second, there's the Android driver that SXX mentioned. Intel was also maintaining a separate mostly-closed driver for embedded but they seem to have stopped updating it recently (maybe it became the android driver, not sure).

                  I think it's fair to say that we are both making increasing use of the open source stack but none of us are 100% there yet.

                  Originally posted by dungeon View Post
                  That is it, if you said i love something then you also need to hate something too, otherwise first statement does not make sense
                  Huh. Guess I've been doing it wrong all these years. Probably explains a few things. Thanks !
                  Last edited by bridgman; 20 May 2015, 05:22 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by bridgman View Post

                    Yeah, I think you're wrong for a couple of reasons. First, Intel doesn't compete in the high end 3D graphics workstation market, and that's the market that Catalyst is written for. Second, there's the Android driver that SXX mentioned. Intel was also maintaining a separate mostly-closed driver for embedded but they seem to have stopped updating it recently (maybe it became the android driver, not sure).

                    I think it's fair to say that we are both making increasing use of the open source stack but none of us are 100% there yet.



                    Huh. Guess I've been doing it wrong all these years. Probably explains a few things. Thanks !
                    i find interesting this approach, i hope in the future AMD reach a point where basically we only have an OSS set of drivers plus closed source addons(if needed) for specialization scenarios(workstations) and maybe external resources that contain specific hacks for games to avoid pollute the drivers codebase fixing game devs crappy code.

                    Ofc i get some people confution since AMD is in a transition phase as i see it, i mean catalyst is fast in 3D(when it works) but as a driver is a nightmare and basically have 0 working features outside 3D for consumers, on the other hand FOSS stack is 99% feature complete as a driver(VCE1.0 are still pending for upstream and opencl 1.2 is not there yet) but is slower in 3D and is a bit behind in GL specs but ironically is ahead too(catalyst GL 4.5 state is unknnown whereas in foss stack is quite advanced and DSA is actually done).

                    so get used to it for a bit of time since right now things are weird but in the future things will start to fall in place, specially once foss stack reach gl4.5

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X