Thats a really good point. In the Case of AMD's OSS driver, it won't function without the firmware, so the ability to redistribute it legally is essential. What exactly is AMD stance on distributing the firmware for their cards?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Digging Deeper Into AMD's UVD Code Drop
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Deathsimple View PostI don't see a reason why it shouldn't work out of the box.
The currently only problematic generations are RS780/RS880 and RV770/RV790.
Christian.
I would report this but i don't know where. because of DRM think.
some info just in case someone can help (please):
dmesg > http://upl.io/lrq31h
glxinfo > http://upl.io/gknd2j
/usr/src/linux/.config > http://upl.io/h0r3u8
vdpauinfo > http://upl.io/3rpmbp
Xorg.0.log > http://upl.io/hssbd7
and when i play a video with mplayer2 i get http://upl.io/k3u57z
and from dmesg http://upl.io/652q1s
pd: i'm so sorry if somebody got a headache because of my english
Comment
-
Originally posted by duby229 View PostThats a really good point. In the Case of AMD's OSS driver, it won't function without the firmware, so the ability to redistribute it legally is essential. What exactly is AMD stance on distributing the firmware for their cards?
From http://people.freedesktop.org/~agd5f...LICENSE.radeon
REDISTRIBUTION: Permission is hereby granted, free of any license fees,
to any person obtaining a copy of this microcode (the "Software"), to
install, reproduce, copy and distribute copies, in binary form only, of
the Software and to permit persons to whom the Software is provided to
do the same, provided that the following conditions are met:
No reverse engineering, decompilation, or disassembly of this Software
is permitted.
Redistributions must reproduce the above copyright notice, this
permission notice, and the following disclaimers and notices in the
Software documentation and/or other materials provided with the
Software.
<snip extra-long version of the standard "Don't blame us!" disclaimer>
Comment
-
Originally posted by hfernando View Post:c It didn't work for me. I downloaded a patched sources from git://people.freedesktop.org/~deathsimple/linux , the uvd-3.9 branch and a the patches for mesa-9.2 from the mail list.
I would report this but i don't know where. because of DRM think.
Comment
-
I have just read this passionate discussion about software, firmware and hardware, and concluded that an essential element is still missing in this SOFT <-> HARD war. A proper definition of what firmware truly is. For me, firmware is exactly the interface between the code and the machine. A layer translating software into hardware, and hardware into software. Nothing more, nothing less. It doesn't matter where it resides. It is NOT software AND it is NOT hardware. It is up to authorities like Richard Stallman to decide whether it should be "free" or not. However, it definitely is not software, so it should not be bound by same set of rules as software.
In this scientific light I can see a way out of this conflict. If current "microcode blob" contains code that does not serve the soft <-> hard translation purpose then move it out. Do what you want with the rest of code. If a market segmentation is required, do it in hardware. If there are too many models of products to manage that - manufacture less models. I keep wondering, why corporations like AMD keep pushing out so many different products which differ only a bit. I believe THIS is a waste of R&D. Why not put out just 3 new models in each new line (best performance, cheapest, balanced) and update previous models to newest tech without changing basic parameters? How about this?
In this discussion I am sure on two opinions:
1. Post-production limitation of hardware is bad practice.
2. Firmware is neither software nor hardware, it is a completely separate unit which ties software and hardware together.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hirager View PostI keep wondering, why corporations like AMD keep pushing out so many different products which differ only a bit. I believe THIS is a waste of R&D.
The rest of the variety comes from our board partners who buy chips from us and design/build their own boards starting with a reference design from AMD.
The discussion about limiting functionality in microcode is hypothetical, offered as a possible reason for having more concerns about RAM-based microcode than equivalent ROM-based microcode. It doesn't really apply to open source drivers anyways since vendors can't "force" a microcode update on users, but it might help to explain some of the instinctive dislike.Test signature
Comment
-
Well the drivers are not really much different. Usually you can fake workstation hardware with a simple fglrx kernel module hack as the check is in the open source part. It does not give you more game performance, just workstation benchmarks like specviewperf run faster.
Comment
-
Excuse me, gentlemen, for slight hijacking into the topic. This is real-world use case.
I am looking for a good used notebook, preferably IBM. So I found "as new" T60. It has Intel chip, so I hope for good stable open intel graphics.
One of them is T60p - p="professional" meaning more advanced graphics. Then I see - "Ati FireGL5200". I decided to ignore it, because I know - its crap.
But still, I googled a bit. Confirmation: "Welcome to a world of pain."
"Performance" my ***...
Another 200$ going into Intel for good opensource blob-free working driver.
Have a nice conversation, excuse me for interruption.
Comment
-
Originally posted by brosis View PostExcuse me, gentlemen, for slight hijacking into the topic. This is real-world use case.
I am looking for a good used notebook, preferably IBM. So I found "as new" T60. It has Intel chip, so I hope for good stable open intel graphics.
One of them is T60p - p="professional" meaning more advanced graphics. Then I see - "Ati FireGL5200". I decided to ignore it, because I know - its crap.
But still, I googled a bit. Confirmation: "Welcome to a world of pain."
"Performance" my ***...
Another 200$ going into Intel for good opensource blob-free working driver.
Have a nice conversation, excuse me for interruption.
I would still probably recommend sticking with Intel in any laptop you buy, but I don't think you can really draw many, if any conclusions about the current driver based on what it was like 3 years ago.
Comment
Comment