AMD Releases UVD Video Decode Support For R600 GPUs

[CGarces]

In the older log there was no RS780_uvd.bin

The file exist at /lib/firmware/radeon

root@antiX1:/lib/firmware/radeon# ls -l RS780*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 90164 ene 11 13:53 RS780_uvd.bin

And dmesg | grep 780 shows:

4 base 000078000000 mask FFFFFC000000 write-back
found SMP MP-table at [mem 0x000ff780-0x000ff78f] mapped at [ffff8800000ff780]
init_memory_mapping: [mem 0x78000000-0x7bbfffff]
 [mem 0x78000000-0x7bbfffff] page 2M
[drm] initializing kernel modesetting (RS780 0x1002:0x9616 0x1849:0x9616).
[drm] Loading RS780 Microcode

How can I know (and fix) if is a problem with the firmware?

[Luke]

I've never HEARD of an individual user software patent lawsuit

Or then you can ignore it like everyone is else and see if MPEG LA sues you

I've never HEARD of an individual user software patent lawsuit, not in my entire life. Remember how GIF nearly
sank under false rumors of demand letters to web hosts using the format? Your hard drive is not online and
cannot be searched without illegal malware, thus no easy path for patent trolls to locate targets

[Luke]

Unjust laws should be defied

Please remember, that it is probably necessary to buy a patent license from MPEG LA to lawfully use the UVD open source support.
We may not like the law, but that does not mean that we could break it.

I do not know how can I get such a license, though.

Actually, we can defy laws aimed at keeping monopolies rich. Justification is the efforts they put into destroying alternatives they do not control. Even the US Patent office recognizes the "interoperability" issue to a limited extend. I will now explain how even in the US we so easly get away with defying software patents, as I do openly:

Keep in mind, as an individual user, not in an office, MPEG-LA cannot find you, and cannot read your hard drive to determine what software you run your video card with. An attempt to do so would require installing malware similar to Sony's XCP rootkit and would scupper any lawsuits based on the take from that malware. The countersuits would do great harm to MPEG-LA as well. This is NOT like Hollywood's crusade against filesharing, where IP addresses are simply read from public torrents if not using a darknet.

MPEG-LA also cannot simply get lists of Linux users from popular websites's IP logs, subpeona IP address to user records from ISP's and then get a warrant to search Linux computers for "illegal" codecs or video acceleration programs. No judge would approve the warrant. Also, it would take very few lawsuits against individual computer users over non-corporate controlled software to cause millions, maybe tens of millions of people, to decide the only way to protect themselves was to discard and destroy ALL computing devices and clear their homes of all products related to the offending industry. This may be the biggest deterrent of all.

The biggest threat is actually trade deals like the TPP and TTIP that could make it difficult to host patent-busting and interoperability software in places like Europe. There will always be countries that refuse to sign trade deals and make more money hosting "outlaw" servers anyway, but proposed trade deals usually include Internet censorship these days, so you could in the future have to download future open codecs against future patented codecs via Tor or a descendent therof. Thus, we should try to sink future codec patents, and to sink sales of products containing patented software without which they cannot be fully used. The existing patents will expire before such a threatening regime can be put fully into place, but we've got to sink any new ones and sink these dirty trade deals. Much of the work I do with video is covering protests and disruption aimed at the people behind things like TPP and TTIP, including protests at their homes.

Given that I have already had one encrypted computer defeat a police raid after a protest they especially disliked-and been part of a group that defeated a lawsuit from "Goldman-Sucks," over residential protests, I am not easily intimidated by threats from patent trolls. They can't read my system, can't get my legal name from ANYTHING, hell I don't even have an ISP registered to my address anywhere in the world. They can kiss my ass with their software patents...

[brosis]

Please remember, that it is probably necessary to buy a patent license from MPEG LA to lawfully use the UVD open source support.
We may not like the law, but that does not mean that we could break it.

I do not know how can I get such a license, though.

ONLY applies to USA.

[Mat2]

MPEG LA is only a licencing pool, it cannot sue anyone for patent infrigement.

I do not expect anyone to sue me, I just want to stay legal.

Licence for H.264 is approx. $0,20 for a device.

AFAIK not everything is processed by the hardware, some parts of H.264 are implemented in software and there is where patents can apply.

[Nille]

sure but from my pov the decoding does the hardware and AMD payed for this already a fee.

[nanonyme]

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mes...ocs/README.UVD


IANAL and this is not 100% clear, but I think that the first paragraph states that licence for H.264 (among others) is necessary.

Or then you can ignore it like everyone is else and see if MPEG LA sues you

[Mat2]

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/tree/docs/README.UVD

The software may implement third party technologies (e.g. third party
libraries) that are not licensed to you by AMD and for which you may need
to obtain licenses from other parties. Unless explicitly stated otherwise,
these third party technologies are not licensed hereunder. Such third
party technologies include, but are not limited, to H.264, MPEG-2, MPEG-4,
AVC, and VC-1.

For MPEG-2 Encoding Products ANY USE OF THIS PRODUCT IN ANY MANNER OTHER
THAN PERSONAL USE THAT COMPLIES WITH THE MPEG-2 STANDARD FOR ENCODING VIDEO
INFORMATION FOR PACKAGED MEDIA IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT A LICENSE
UNDER APPLICABLE PATENTS IN THE MPEG-2 PATENT PORTFOLIO, WHICH LICENSES IS
AVAILABLE FROM MPEG LA, LLC, 6312 S. Fiddlers Green Circle, Suite 400E,
Greenwood Village, Colorado 80111 U.S.A.

IANAL and this is not 100% clear, but I think that the first paragraph states that licence for H.264 (among others) is necessary.

[Nille]

Please remember, that it is probably necessary to buy a patent license from MPEG LA to lawfully use the UVD open source support.

Why? Does we all not pay for the License with the hardware?

[Mat2]

Please remember, that it is probably necessary to buy a patent license from MPEG LA to lawfully use the UVD open source support.
We may not like the law, but that does not mean that we could break it.

I do not know how can I get such a license, though.