AMD Open-Source GPU Kernel Driver Above 5 Million Lines, Entire Linux Kernel At 34.8 Million

[Sonadow]

Not 100% sure if it's optional, but it's needed for OpenCL I believe for sure. Maybe some functionality is disabled without it, but I wouldn't want to go without it (that's like disabling CUDA on Nvidia).

Then it's no big deal. I don't use OpenCL for the most part. And my current build of Mesa 23.0 also doesn't include OpenCL.

[mlau]

So funny, huh? Specially when you need to use new hardware and that's only possibly when running the latest kernel which also has criticial regressions which make it impossible to use it. So freaking funny. Here, enjoy this:

For years you've been basically complaining that linux/distros are not like windows (perf/drivers/convenience/..). Then why not use windows and be happy? (and spare us your nonsensical rants).

[avis]

For years you've been basically complaining that linux/distros are not like windows (perf/drivers/convenience/..). Then why not use windows and be happy? (and spare us your nonsensical rants).

Welcome to my blacklist. Learn to argue not to assault the other person. Assaulting means you've lost the argument completely.

I provided very solid arguments why the Linux kernel development model is sub-optimal to put it mildly which results in a very bad experience and an inability to use your system for a number of users. You replied with what? "Go to Windows?" Would be great if you stopped telling me what to do, so that I wouldn't tell you where to go. My name is listed in the kernel development log at least a dozen times. What are you achievements? Insulting others on Phoronix? Whoa, take a fucking cookie - just don't choke on it.

[mlau]

Welcome to my blacklist. Learn to argue not to assault the other person. Assaulting means you've lost the argument completely.

I provided very solid arguments why the Linux kernel development model is sub-optimal to put it mildly which results in a very bad experience and an inability to use your system for a number of users. You replied with what? "Go to Windows?"

Stop criticizing (an ranting) from the sidelines and start working on this then. The sooner you realize the world doesn't revolve around you and your wishes of what linux should and should not be, the better for everyone.

[Weasel]

Stop criticizing (an ranting) from the sidelines and start working on this then. The sooner you realize the world doesn't revolve around you and your wishes of what linux should and should not be, the better for everyone.

Not everyone is a submissive carpet like you.

If you don't like the complaints then don't read them and live in your bubble.

Your replies have literally zero value.

[Citan]

It's great to see that some Linux fans use introspection A welcome change.

(I know that was sarcasm but it was unwarranted as you did not provide any arguments which shows hubris and nothing else. Windows users can use any drivers they want, Linux users cry about bugs they cannot fix and their benevolent AMD/Intel spend months or even years fixing. But that's Linux and open source drivers, right? All drivers are perfect, right? Wrong. Ha, ha. Funny. Not.)

How does Michael live with such blurry fonts? Here's what I see:

Won't ever answer to Sonadow since he's become right insulting.
So why didn't I bring arguments? Because I don't have time nor the resources to cater up a complete, source argumentary. But I consider my experience of a "random user and family" no lesser value than anyone else's.

And mine experience? Is one of overall bliss with Linux as far as installing and using goes since kinda more than 10 years. EXCEPT on a) graphic acceleration, which was complex to understand until the very last years (thanks Valve). And occasional scanning peripheral when I needed to use hardware for which drivers were actively obfuscated.
I could also quote many examples in Windows 10 era of my parents, or brother/sisters, or friends, getting forced to upgrade from Windows 7 or 8 and getting stuck for months without any working printer.
Or heavy bugs because of an unwarranted, unwanted upgrade Windows shoved up the throat even though user said "No I don't want it now".

Problems exist on all OS. Windows ones for the end users are just far more prevalent nowadays as long as you don't try to use ultra bleeding edge or extremely niche professional hardware. Because Linux puts the *user* in control, from a stable basis. You want to dive right deep? Sure, enjoy and learn how to be 10 times more productive. You'd rather spend as few time as possible and be as light as possible? No problem, we'll just take care of upgrades in a silent, unattended way, at a time of *your* choosing.

Windows? Puts *Microsoft* in control, to cater for *its* needs and goals first and foremost. You'd like to keep as is even in spite of security risks or just fearing for paying useless features with unstability? No dice, it's mandatory. You have limited internet access? No worries, we're just monitoring much personal data and sending it regularly. You'd like to see what process apparently slows down PC? Arf, you'd probably wouldn't get it in the first place, that's why we won't even show you. You don't like the shortcut and general paradigm of your user interface? Well, suck it. We won't change. It may be your machine but it is OUR product.

To summarize: with Linux, you *can* elevate yourself as much as you can to gain control of your system and learn how to run and improve it. YOU are the driver as long/wide as you want. With Windows, you are in the passenger seat. Forcibly.
It's not complex really to see how nefast it is in the long run for you as the consumer.

And that reflects also on the drivers and peripheral support. If I want to keep a ten-year old system as is, I can. If I want to install a new system and still use the old hardware, it will probably work out of the box on Linux. No interaction needed. If by any chance it's not officially supported anymore, even as a end consumer incapable of building drivers on my own, I can ask for some help somewhere. If enough people are in my case, a good will may decide to maintain a package or reconsider integration into kernel again.
On Microsoft side, or manufacturer side? If it does not see immediate profit, you're on our own, no regret.

[Citan]

Yep, and it's literally the same on Linux. I fucking hate forced updates, especially when they update everything.

I just want to update whenever I want, and the component I want. Only one, especially when it's as fragile as a hardware driver. Jesus Christ.

I've never seen "forced updates" on Linux, whatever distribution I've been using. Not sure how you get that.
However I did notice a trend since many years (possibly as far as 10 now) of distribution which completely negate the essence of the package distribution system by pushing ALL packages in one system upgrade like everything is dependant on everything.

And I am 100% with you here, that's a huge recession in user experience quality (and even sysadmin quality). Seen that on Ubuntu first, made me leave it. But nowadays I fail to find one that still actually knows how to properly manage packages... :/

[bridgman]

People always say "but these are just header files". What actually are header files? Why does only AMD need them in their driver? What is a better way to handle this?

What are header files ?

Header files ("register header files") are what allow programmers to write code like...

WREG32(mmMC_VM_SYSTEM_APERTURE_LOW_ADDR, adev->gmc.vram_start >> 12);

... instead of ...

WREG32(0x80d, adev->gmc.vram_start >> 12);

The first example above is actual driver code from: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux...gpu/gmc_v8_0.c

At compile time, the compiler looks up "mmMC_VM_SYSTEM_APERTURE_LOW_ADDR" in the header files, guided by lines like this in the driver code file:

#include "gmc/gmc_8_1_d.h"

header file is: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux...mc/gmc_8_1_d.h

The corresponding line in the header file is:

#define mmMC_VM_SYSTEM_APERTURE_LOW_ADDR ............................................ 0x80d

(I used dots to separate string and offset - the forum software takes out the spaces/tabs)

Combining code and header files allows the compiler to generate code that writes a value to GPU register offset 0x080d while keeping the source code readable. Using names rather than offsets makes the code a bit larger AND needs header files to translate strings to numbers, but so far this is all common practice.

Why does only AMD need them in their driver ?

Most vendors use header files - ours are just larger than most so people have fun talking about the size. Header files do not get compiled into the driver - they are just used to translate from developer-friendly strings to hardware-friendly numbers - so the size of the header files does not actually affect the size of the compiled kernel.

What is a better way to handle this ?

Our header files used to be much smaller since we only included #define's for registers that were actually being used by the driver.

Developers wanted to know about all of the registers though, not just the ones we were using at the moment, so rather than hand-building compact header files we started using the raw register header files generated from VHDL/Verilog. This made the header files much larger, but since the header files are not actually compiled into the kernel they don't make the kernel any larger.

We could make the header files ~1/10th of their size by going back to only including #define's for registers the driver was using, but since the larger header files have no impact other than when downloading driver source code I think we would get more people complaining than supporting the change if we did that.

We could also do things like delta-compressing similar header files - that could cut the total file size by maybe 50% but would require us to add a decompression step to the build process and make browsing the files more difficult. Again that seems like a no-win.

[avis]

long quote

What do you mean by "control"?

What control do you have with Linux (which your life/work essential) that you don't have with Windows outside of using obscure window managers and fancy keyboard shortcuts?

And do you really think the vast majority of people even care about "control"?

People need to get work done, run software, play games, use their PCs features. It's a 20fold better experience and options in all of that under Windows than Linux. I certainly don't care about "control".

I use Linux not because of control, I love tinkering, I love participating in something for the common good, I love contributing to it, yet I'm quite averse to the most vocal Linux fans who make Linux their religion and denigrate anyone who thinks or uses something that's not open source. Meanwhile the same Linux fans have no qualms running proprietary software and games under Wine/Proton. This is the worst form of hypocrisy plain and simple.

Windows? Puts *Microsoft* in control, to cater for *its* needs and goals first and foremost. You'd like to keep as is even in spite of security risks or just fearing for paying useless features with unstability? No dice, it's mandatory. You have limited internet access? No worries, we're just monitoring much personal data and sending it regularly. You'd like to see what process apparently slows down PC? Arf, you'd probably wouldn't get it in the first place, that's why we won't even show you. You don't like the shortcut and general paradigm of your user interface? Well, suck it. We won't change. It may be your machine but it is OUR product.

This whole paragraph is unfortunately blatant lies on top of myths and exaggerations. Microsoft does collect some data to make run Windows better. It has not and it does not spy on its users and Windows does not slow down intentionally just to pester you. Windows is used by FBI, NSA, CIA, the US government and most governments and security agencies of the world. Thinking Windows leaks data to the extent you portrayed means there's espionage on a very wide scale everyone turns a blind eye to. I'm sorry, I'm not into conspiracies, lies and lunacies. Anyone with two brain cells can install WireShark in Windows and see all the network traffic. Windows has been spying on people according to Linux fans for over a decade. Why there's not a single bloody article on the net exposing all the vast data that Windows is leaking?

And that reflects also on the drivers and peripheral support. If I want to keep a ten-year old system as is, I can. If I want to install a new system and still use the old hardware, it will probably work out of the box on Linux. No interaction needed. If by any chance it's not officially supported anymore, even as a end consumer incapable of building drivers on my own, I can ask for some help somewhere. If enough people are in my case, a good will may decide to maintain a package or reconsider integration into kernel again.
On Microsoft side, or manufacturer side? If it does not see immediate profit, you're on our own, no regret.

1. Support costs money.
2. A ton of 10yo computers run fine under Windows 10.
3. Anything older will likely not have drivers for the GPU and probably some peripheral devices. The problem is point number 1. It's not Windows' fault OEMs choose not to support your old hardware. They don't have and don't need to. We are talking about a handful of people in the whole world they must invest heavily to appease.
4. If you're a large enough company OEMs will release drivers for your obscure old HW if you pay them handsomely.
5. This old HW is so old and feeble:
5.1 It's unusable for anything modern, even browsing the web will be an exercise in patience.
5.2 It's best served by contemporary to it software, i.e. whatever was relevant back then and it's actually how people normally run this hardware.

The issue is you tried to portray Linux "superiority" under a very unusual scenario which is relevant for ~0.001% of people in the world. While it's valid, it's not relevant and is not an argument because I can give you arguments for Windows which are far far far stronger.

Looks like Linux is very dear to your heart but please try to stay rational and factual when talking about other OSes or otherwise you come off as a fanatic. I've been using Linux for more than 25 years (far more than 99% of people in this community) as my primary OS (I only game under Windows) but I don't try to make stuff up to show Linux as superior. It's different, not superior. Don't make anything in your life a religion except yourself. Believing in yourself is necessary to survive and being happy.