Originally posted by bridgman
View Post
Ok, I re-read some of earlier posts in this "thread" (which is getting to be Tolstoy-esque in length) and you are right that there was a certain amount of talking past one another, but, when Matthew chimed in, and Dave then explained why they choose not to purse static PM further (the hope seemed to be that if they didn't improve the PM further there might be more push from the AMD side to get the relevant docs for talking to the PM system and they also seemed like they wanted to avoid further code review on any changes they make) the conversation kinda stopped.
Assuming Matthew and Dave were right, I don't see why anyone would attempt to further improve the current PM implementation unless the effort were directed towards reverse-engineering. The amount of work and the expected results just don't make sense. Again, this is assuming they were correct.
Best/Liam
Leave a comment: