Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

In Road To OpenCL, R600g LLVM Back-End Arrives

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

  • phoronix
    started a topic In Road To OpenCL, R600g LLVM Back-End Arrives

    In Road To OpenCL, R600g LLVM Back-End Arrives

    Phoronix: In Road To OpenCL, R600g LLVM Back-End Arrives

    Before calling it a week, Tom Stellard at AMD published a Git branch that offers up an LLVM shader back-end for the AMD R600 Gallium3D driver. This is one of the steps in bringing Compute/OpenCL support to the open-source AMD Radeon Linux graphics drivers...

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

  • NomadDemon
    replied
    Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    Hrm, I remember playing QuakeLive on my HD 4550 just fine a couple of years ago.

    Is it a framerate issue, or does it refuse to start?
    framedrops, frameskipps, unable to play, works like on celeron 800 and riva tnt even worse

    on fglrx theres no problem

    i did all the stuff with vsynch etc, not any better, even worse.

    changing details to low, make it works worse -10 fps.

    have constant 45-50 fps, no more
    Last edited by NomadDemon; 12-12-2011, 08:56 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • 89c51
    replied
    Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    You mean: they use Windows.

    Because Windows drivers are still better than Linux blobs.

    So if you're using blobs on Linux, you are making sacrifices too. The only question is where you make them: security, performance, ease of maintenance, reliability, integration with your desktop, power consumption, your ethical standards, Digital Restriction Management, etc.

    For many people, FLOSS drivers under Linux provide the best environment.
    Whatever gets the job done

    In some cases its windows in others linux in others mac or whatever

    Leave a comment:


  • pingufunkybeat
    replied
    Hrm, I remember playing QuakeLive on my HD 4550 just fine a couple of years ago.

    Is it a framerate issue, or does it refuse to start?

    Leave a comment:


  • NomadDemon
    replied
    i like open drivers for gpu, more than fglrx, but cant even play quake live on open drivers on radeon 4850.. that suck hard wine cant open even starcraft/pharaoh good with no fglrx. thes are very old games with even no 3d, but still work very very slow, or dont work at all.

    now another restriction, and another

    in future open drivers will only show desktop consume max power, but give you good system integration [and bad svideo output]

    thats not that we are fighting for. I can use binary plugins, need to use it for HP 1020 printers is this any violation? not for me, i need hardware to work. its only plugin you can manualy install [accept to install] same as audio/video codecs. some of them are close source and we still use it. iam not gpl purist i just need pc working.

    Leave a comment:


  • pingufunkybeat
    replied
    You mean: they use Windows.

    Because Windows drivers are still better than Linux blobs.

    So if you're using blobs on Linux, you are making sacrifices too. The only question is where you make them: security, performance, ease of maintenance, reliability, integration with your desktop, power consumption, your ethical standards, Digital Restriction Management, etc.

    For many people, FLOSS drivers under Linux provide the best environment.

    Leave a comment:


  • 89c51
    replied
    Originally posted by duby229 View Post
    A bit OT, but I'm also of the opinion that binary plugins to an OSS application effectively taints the application. If the OSS code is GPLd then the binary plugin is a gpl violation in my opinion... Perfect example, binary linux drivers...

    I know many people who disagree with me mightily, but I also know many people who agree with me mightily. And being a linux community, I'd argue there are more people who agree with me....
    a) People want to get their job done fast and efficiently

    b) People don't care if the software kills baby kittens everytime they hit the space button if it gets the job done

    c) The rest is bullshit by people whom job has all the OS tools they need

    And the perfect example for this is graphic cards. Anyone that wants 100% performance and features uses the blobs.

    Leave a comment:


  • duby229
    replied
    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    This is getting off topic for an LLVM thread but quick answer is that a binary plug-in for an open source driver doesn't give enough protection to make any real difference -- either something is safe enough to release source code or it's not safe enough to release as a plug-in to an otherwise open driver. It seemed like an attractive idea at first but I haven't seen binary plug-ins used for a few years now.
    A bit OT, but I'm also of the opinion that binary plugins to an OSS application effectively taints the application. If the OSS code is GPLd then the binary plugin is a gpl violation in my opinion... Perfect example, binary linux drivers...

    I know many people who disagree with me mightily, but I also know many people who agree with me mightily. And being a linux community, I'd argue there are more people who agree with me....
    Last edited by duby229; 12-11-2011, 11:48 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • bridgman
    replied
    This is getting off topic for an LLVM thread but quick answer is that a binary plug-in for an open source driver doesn't give enough protection to make any real difference -- either something is safe enough to release source code or it's not safe enough to release as a plug-in to an otherwise open driver. It seemed like an attractive idea at first but I haven't seen binary plug-ins used for a few years now.
    Last edited by bridgman; 12-11-2011, 03:06 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • NomadDemon
    replied
    is this problem to include DRM as closed-source plugin for drivers/players ?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X