Originally posted by Ericg
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
R600 Gallium3D Patch Boosts Unigine By ~30%
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by blacknova View PostIf instead of fixing kernel breaks people with skill would spend the same time working on actual drivers, the drivers in question would be much better.All opinions are my own not those of my employer if you know who they are.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ericg View PostYou dont get the driver right the first time. Like the major nouveau rewrite that happened 2 releases ago. To write good quality drivers someimes you have to stop and go "....We fucked this up." Scrap some work and start over. Which breaks things in the process.
Are you saying that driver rewrite would become any simpler just because kernel interfaces have been changed and now developers need to figure out the new way, to do something that have been already working. Yeah, right.
Comment
-
Originally posted by blacknova View PostAnd how complete driver rewrite correlate to stable kernel interfaces? Driver seriously is independent piece of software which strongly relying on some services provided by kernel, e.g. pci bus support, memory management, etc.
Are you saying that driver rewrite would become any simpler just because kernel interfaces have been changed and now developers need to figure out the new way, to do something that have been already working. Yeah, right.All opinions are my own not those of my employer if you know who they are.
Comment
-
Originally posted by blacknova View PostAnd how complete driver rewrite correlate to stable kernel interfaces? Driver seriously is independent piece of software which strongly relying on some services provided by kernel, e.g. pci bus support, memory management, etc.
Are you saying that driver rewrite would become any simpler just because kernel interfaces have been changed and now developers need to figure out the new way, to do something that have been already working. Yeah, right.
Furthermore just look at Xorg for just why stable apis don't really belong in monolithic designs, part of the entire reason it's so crappy is that it's got a Stable API that they can't touch and thus they've been forced to write extensions to get around the problem (I.E. they have to work around the issues of the X.org protocol). Does this really sound like something that should be happening with the kernel as well? Even Qt which insures ABI and API compatibility over major versions and is modularly designed does breaks which cause the creation of a new major version. Which means even something like it doesn't really have a stable API but a versioned API, which is the only thing you might have an argument for but that falls through due to the monolithic design of the kernel.Last edited by Luke_Wolf; 18 February 2013, 07:42 PM.
Comment
-
Actually X's way of depreciating interfaces is even nicer.... accidentally, quietly, break an interface / API. Someone comes along years later, notices that its been broken for years and no one noticed. The assumption is "Well no ones complained so I guess no one uses that anymore" Then they vocally and deliberately remove that interface/API and that chunk of code is gone lolAll opinions are my own not those of my employer if you know who they are.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rigaldo View PostIt shouldn't be much of an issue if the in-kernel interfaces were backwards compatible. But this won't happen soon I guess ... As needs arise(and hopefully more resources too), things should improve on these sectors too. But sorry, I'm getting a bit of topic now.
But you keep on #TiltingAtWindmills
Comment
-
Originally posted by agd5f View PostWhat automated tools would you suggest? There weren't any piglit tests which triggered the issue. Unfortunately, automated testing is often a challenge for GPU development. For best results you generally need physical access to the hardware.
1) Github ot other git repo for code upload with hooks for compilation with various configurations. (Did you know that mesa 9.0 wont compile with comands from radeonBuildHowTo? I know. I was told that on IRC after 4h of traying )
2) PTS + some defined collection of apps (open source so you can be sure that "testing" code is in fact bug free), for performance testing.
3) Piglit for any regressions in OpenGL that can be detected that way.
4) PTS + games + automated screen shot + diff for images and warnings for too much difference between reference image (taken on Catalyst drivers..), and currently obtained.
5) Whatever you can get for testing delays between following frames.
6) Restoration of "clean" configuration on multiple failed boots.
Everyghtin of above compared to reference (either last stable mesa+kernel+server, or Catalyst, which is better for you).
Oh, and Server that would manage automatic restart of hw/ queuing test request from various developers, and replicating test runs on different hw configurations, as well as managing reporting.
Better?Last edited by przemoli; 19 February 2013, 06:51 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ericg View PostActually X's way of depreciating interfaces is even nicer.... accidentally, quietly, break an interface / API. Someone comes along years later, notices that its been broken for years and no one noticed. The assumption is "Well no ones complained so I guess no one uses that anymore" Then they vocally and deliberately remove that interface/API and that chunk of code is gone lol
Unfortunately that do not work for core X protocol.
So we still have paining of cool squares...
Comment
Comment