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

  • #41
    Originally posted by sandy8925 View Post
    No excuses, just plain old logic and reason - stop writing crappy code and stop the practice of NIH.
    maybe you should stop posting shit?

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by L_A_G View Post
      I wonder what David is going to come up this time to stop DAL/DC from being merged? Not enough time to properly review the code? Too much redundant code because they're not cleaning away all the old AMD display code? Still too much abstraction going on? Code quality not up to standards?

      The last one would be particularly eyebrow raising remembering the state in which he merged TinyDRM and (rightfully) found himself on the receiving end of one of Linus' rants where he called it "absolute pure shit that has never seen a compiler".
      Lols, tinydrm had seen lots of compilers, Linus was just being an idiot. but I don't get your logic (possibly because the concept of logic it outside your grasp).

      Your proof that I can't judge DAL code quality is that I merged tinydrm? Even though DAL code quality on any level is way worse than tinydrm.

      so should I merge it or not?
      Dave.

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by airlied View Post

        Lols, tinydrm had seen lots of compilers, Linus was just being an idiot. but I don't get your logic (possibly because the concept of logic it outside your grasp).

        Your proof that I can't judge DAL code quality is that I merged tinydrm? Even though DAL code quality on any level is way worse than tinydrm.

        so should I merge it or not?
        Dave.
        Please, we need it. Code quality can improve.

        EDIT: What about putting it in staging? Is that a possibility?

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by duby229 View Post

          Please, we need it. Code quality can improve.

          EDIT: What about putting it in staging? Is that a possibility?
          I don't think you can put parts of drivers to staging. But please correct me if I'm wrong here, I could very well be.

          Comment


          • #45
            It's really this problem right here.
            https://www.phoronix.com/forums/foru...746#post978746

            That's not gonna get resolved until it gets upstream. I think AMD is trying really hard and they seem like they are doing the best they can right now. But these are really difficult problems and they don't have enough manpower to keep this out of the kernel.

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by airlied View Post

              Lols, tinydrm had seen lots of compilers, Linus was just being an idiot. but I don't get your logic (possibly because the concept of logic it outside your grasp).

              Your proof that I can't judge DAL code quality is that I merged tinydrm? Even though DAL code quality on any level is way worse than tinydrm.

              so should I merge it or not?
              Dave.
              One the one hand: if code quality of DAL is even worse than tinydrm (and that quote from Linus is valid), then Linus may have a fatal heart attack and we are eventually bound to Microsoft.
              On the other hand: 1. I am looking forward for Vega, although I didn't bought one yet (waiting for custom designs). Especially for the MxGPU feature so I can have Linux as host and have a bunch of VMs for the gaming kids (and me). So finally having Linux as main system (will switch at work to Linux soon, too. Thank you Microsoft for Windows 10 :-) ).
              2. Furthermore Linus rants are always fun to read.
              3. And finally: as a long term AMD stock owner (bought 2007 with hope of a great new CPU), a long term AMD user (I am still waiting for the promised feature of combining the 690G onboard GPU with a discrete GPU and being able to switch when needed (like the laptops are doing)) and a soon-to-be Ryzen 7 owner, I vote for a merge (which makes point 1 double in value).
              So it's 3:1 for a merge.

              Comment


              • #47
                Everything came with AMD GPUs are experimental, first powerplay (amdgpu.powerplay=1) and now this (amdgpu.dc=1). Why they can't publish a code that works fine at the first day?? although I'm happy that finally DC become acceptable.

                Comment


                • #48
                  I'm staying out of that mess... Anyone know if amdgpu.dc=1 is valid for the old DC stack (or if it will be ignored for the DC stack I have already in kernel 4.12 (from mBab). I have a Carrizo based notebook that will not work at all with out DC and want to be sure I can preset that in advance.

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    I hope eventually an option is provided to disable temporal dithering in the new AMDGPU driver. I already have a native 8-bit color depth display, but it still dithers from the GPU

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by airlied View Post

                      Lols, tinydrm had seen lots of compilers, Linus was just being an idiot. but I don't get your logic (possibly because the concept of logic it outside your grasp).

                      Your proof that I can't judge DAL code quality is that I merged tinydrm? Even though DAL code quality on any level is way worse than tinydrm.

                      so should I merge it or not?
                      Dave.
                      IF abstractions stuff is gone then - please merge it.
                      If not - nah, it's need more work.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X