Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMDGPU DC Pull Request Submitted For Linux 4.15: Finally The New Display Stack

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • L_A_G
    replied
    Originally posted by ?John? View Post
    Are you kidding?
    This particular "random internet schmuck" happens to be Daniel Vetter from Intel OTC (you know, former i915 DRM maintainer and stuff), so I think he's more than qualified for a little bit of "random GPU driver babble" here and there…
    Did you even read what I wrote in the same post where I joked about just being a random schmuck on the internet? Because I based that assessment on Linus' judgment, not my own.

    I'm pretty sure there aren't allthat many people who can speak with more authority on the subject of what GCC warnings can be ignored when compiling the linux kernel (Greg Kroah-Hartman?)
    Last edited by L_A_G; 28 September 2017, 07:47 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • duby229
    replied
    This isn't sounding good at all.....

    Leave a comment:


  • ?John?
    replied
    Originally posted by schwarzman View Post
    I'm totally unqualified to answer this but IIRC they added support for Vega. I think also the display layer ("dc") gained some lines by supporting these (even though power management increased even more).
    Could be but I would expect the cleanup to make it significantly smaller and then maybe getting back to something like the original size AFTER adding support for all the new hardware.

    Leave a comment:


  • schwarzman
    replied
    Originally posted by ?John? View Post
    Don't get me wrong, because I started using exclusively AMD GPUs ever since AMD resumed their open source efforts and they all work absolutely marvelous (to the point that I no longer even consider nVidia and actively discourage anyone else from using their binary crap), but how on Earth was this "display code" CLEANED UP from some 100kLOC ("93kLOC to run the displays when whole drivers don't even come close") to almost 130kLOC during at least 414 workdays (594 calendar days) of "this time trying real hard to get it absolutely right"⁈
    I'm totally unqualified to answer this but IIRC they added support for Vega. I think also the display layer ("dc") gained some lines by supporting these (even though power management increased even more).

    Leave a comment:


  • schwarzman
    replied
    Originally posted by L_A_G View Post
    To you maybe... I've never heard of you so to me who or what you claim to be is quite frankly irrelevant.
    Oh well, just to spend my personal troll time budget for today I'll give you a hint: DanVet.

    Btw: One thing I love about "Linux"/free software is the amount of time I can spend to talk to developers directly. This direct "support" by senior developers like Daniel/Dave costs a lot of $$$ in the corporate world (and probably they wouldn't be called "senior developer" but more something like "super vice president global research&development" ;-). Even more amazing that Dave+Daniel spent time replying to Phoronix trolls... I guess everyone needs a timeout from time to time. Now Dave it's time to go back to work ;-)

    Leave a comment:


  • ?John?
    replied
    Originally posted by L_A_G View Post
    To you maybe... I've never heard of you so to me who or what you claim to be is quite frankly irrelevant.

    Meh... If you think you know better than Linus that's your prerogative, but you shouldn't expect everyone to agree with you.
    Are you kidding?
    This particular "random internet schmuck" happens to be Daniel Vetter from Intel OTC (you know, former i915 DRM maintainer and stuff), so I think he's more than qualified for a little bit of "random GPU driver babble" here and there…

    Back on topic:
    Don't get me wrong, because I started using exclusively AMD GPUs ever since AMD resumed their open source efforts and they all work absolutely marvelous (to the point that I no longer even consider nVidia and actively discourage anyone else from using their binary crap), but how on Earth was this "display code" CLEANED UP from some 100kLOC ("93kLOC to run the displays when whole drivers don't even come close") to almost 130kLOC during at least 414 workdays (594 calendar days) of "this time trying real hard to get it absolutely right"⁈
    Last edited by ?John?; 28 September 2017, 07:04 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • L_A_G
    replied
    Originally posted by danvet View Post
    Oh I'm a random internet schmuck who accidentally has 3k commits in the kernel and happened to be invited to the kernel summit last 4 times. Seriously, you need to try harder ... this isn't much fun like this.
    To you maybe... I've never heard of you so to me who or what you claim to be is quite frankly irrelevant.

    1/10 at least I chuckled.
    Meh... If you think you know better than Linus that's your prerogative, but you shouldn't expect everyone to agree with you.

    Leave a comment:


  • danvet
    replied
    Originally posted by L_A_G View Post

    There's minor things GCC can complain about and then there's more major things. I think Linus, being the original creator and lead maintainer of the whole Linux project, can tell the two apart. When he complains about nasty compiler warnings, it's probably worth taking note.

    You may have had a point if it was just me, some random schmuck on the internet, talking about the compiler warnings. However I'm pretty sure Linus has a much better idea of what kinds of warnings thrown up by GCC are worth being worried by than random internet schmuck #2 (i.e you).



    Translation: I don't have an argument so I'm just going to act like this guy is trolling and claim victory that way.
    Oh I'm a random internet schmuck who accidentally has 3k commits in the kernel and happened to be invited to the kernel summit last 4 times. Seriously, you need to try harder ... this isn't much fun like this.

    1/10 at least I chuckled.

    Leave a comment:


  • L_A_G
    replied
    Originally posted by danvet View Post
    Sounds like you never actually managed to compile things even once, much less understand what gcc tells you. I'm impressed. Where's your hundreds of kernel patches merged into upstream that actually show you have any idea at all what you're babbling about?
    There's minor things GCC can complain about and then there's more major things. I think Linus, being the original creator and lead maintainer of the whole Linux project, can tell the two apart. When he complains about nasty compiler warnings, it's probably worth taking note.

    You may have had a point if it was just me, some random schmuck on the internet, talking about the compiler warnings. However I'm pretty sure Linus has a much better idea of what kinds of warnings thrown up by GCC are worth being worried by than random internet schmuck #2 (i.e you).

    0/10, not even amused, much lesss entertained. Please try to troll harder.
    Translation: I don't have an argument so I'm just going to act like this guy is trolling and claim victory that way.

    Leave a comment:


  • danvet
    replied
    Originally posted by L_A_G View Post

    He didn't even try to address the tens of lines of compiler warnings or the points about the chains of nestled defines nor does he address the issue he uses to excuse the compile failure.
    Sounds like you never actually managed to compile things even once, much less understand what gcc tells you. I'm impressed. Where's your hundreds of kernel patches merged into upstream that actually show you have any idea at all what you're babbling about?

    0/10, not even amused, much lesss entertained. Please try to troll harder.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X