amdgpu questions

[agd5f]

I see the radeon feature matrix has been updated w/ this info: http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature/
listed done for HDMI audio and TODO for DP before, I think...
Will pre-VI cards used with amdgpu also support HDMI/DP audio?

Yes, DAL supports all asics supported by amdgpu.

Can you tell if the open vulkan userspace driver is going to be the same one, transitioned to foss or a project on it's own?

We will be open sourcing our closed source implementation.

Do you think it would make sense to implement ogl on top of vk (once the vk driver is done) for a vendor-independent ogl 4.x implementation?

No.

[duby229]

speaking about yourself?

Well, maybe not. But it would be a good project to learn on I think. Hey, I may not be a great programmer, but I'm certain there are great programmers that read these forums. Don't get me wrong though, I do dabble. I have contributed bug reports and fixes to a number of projects. I do try to do my fair share.

[juno]

speaking about yourself?

[duby229]

It's already implemented in radeon. For amdgpu, it requires DAL.



It will require DAL. However, there is a lot of driver independent work required to expose freesync in a generally useful way.



They use the same firmware with the exception of the UVD and VCE firmware. The only difference in the UVD and VCE firmware is the lack of support in radeon for handling the new firmware header format for UVD and VCE. It someone is interested, they could port the support for the new header format from amdgpu to radeon. However, there is no real advantage to doing so feature-wise other than to share the same firmware image so it's not something we are planning to do.

Yeah, that seems perfectly fine to me. Imean really if the only benefit to it is the fact that they can use the same firmware files but otherwise functionally the same difference, then it doesn't need to be done.

Although, I do think it would be a good project for a new contributor to learn on. Anybody looking to get their feet wet may want to consider this contribution.

[juno]

I see the radeon feature matrix has been updated w/ this info: http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature/
listed done for HDMI audio and TODO for DP before, I think...
Will pre-VI cards used with amdgpu also support HDMI/DP audio?

Can you tell if the open vulkan userspace driver is going to be the same one, transitioned to foss or a project on it's own?

Do you think it would make sense to implement ogl on top of vk (once the vk driver is done) for a vendor-independent ogl 4.x implementation?

If it makes things seem any better you have no finished apps either...

Do selected devs have access to an early vk implementation of AMD for linux?

Can we expect day 1 support for post-VI cards?

[agd5f]

- how high on the priority list is DP audio? Does it depend on DAL being merged?

It's already implemented in radeon. For amdgpu, it requires DAL.

- how high on the priority list is FreeSync? Does it depend on DAL being merged?

It will require DAL. However, there is a lot of driver independent work required to expose freesync in a generally useful way.

- do you have any plans to unify the firmware used by the radeon/amdgpu drivers? For example radeon uses radeon/BONAIRE_uvd.bin and radeon/BONAIRE_vce.bin for all Sea Islands cards while amdgpu uses chipset specific blobs. I know most people will not even notice this, but it's annoying when having the driver built-in.

They use the same firmware with the exception of the UVD and VCE firmware. The only difference in the UVD and VCE firmware is the lack of support in radeon for handling the new firmware header format for UVD and VCE. It someone is interested, they could port the support for the new header format from amdgpu to radeon. However, there is no real advantage to doing so feature-wise other than to share the same firmware image so it's not something we are planning to do.

[bridgman]

Still, having Vulkan capable GPUs and no finished drivers...

If it makes things seem any better you have no finished apps either...

[haagch]

Something something the hero we deserve, but not the one we need right now

I'm not complaining about the spec launch. Spec is better than no spec. Early drivers are better than no drivers.

Still, having Vulkan capable GPUs and no finished drivers...



It's kinda the early availability of DirectX12 that put so high expectations on Vulkan. People were running DirectX12 test applications on hardware from all 3 major GPU vendors almost a full year ago... No design by committee and no cross platform functionality must be a huge productivity boost... Maybe we still can have hope that DirectX12 may have other shortcomings Vulkan doesn't have..

[bridgman]

For better or worse this is what open standard launches look like.

The only way you're going to get frozen specs, polished drivers and ready-to-go apps all lined up for the launch is if there's another 6-12 months of work in secret after the standard is mostly settled, and I don't think anyone wanted to see that.

What you got was each vendor implementing on at least one platform (typically the newest) in order to be able to contribute intelligently to the evolving API spec discussions. Once the spec settled down and was ratified (which is basically what triggered the NDA lift) the rest of the work could start.

[haagch]

Thanks for the answer.

That sucks though. So nvidia doesn't support Fermi, intel is only mostly finished on Broadwell and newer and still has a lot to do for Ivy Bridge and Haswell and AMD doesn't have anything public yet and will yet need longer for SI. That's not the Vulkan launch we all hoped for...