An Update On The OpenGL 3 Support In Mesa

[glisse]

This was in response to various people claiming that the Linux driver model of requiring hardware vendors to open source their drivers and put them in the kernel is a good idea. When vendors don't do that, the next claim is that it's enough for them to open up their docs so that "the community will code the drivers and features."

It doesn't look that way. Proprietary drivers support GL3 for ages now, while the open driver stack is still based on old, outdated specs. IMO this is proof enough that the Linux driver model is wrong and its supporters too. Otherwise the open graphics stack would have been feature complete years ago.

I think it has more to do with the number of people and the size of graphic driver which are the biggest driver in the kernel (and not everythings is in the kernel). To me it's more like opensource is around 30 peoples accross all hw & core mesa while each closed source driver are likely done by way more than 300 people working full time.

By the way the closed source driver on linux use the linux driver model (or maybe i am missing what you mean by the driver model).

[Remco]

Haters gonna hate.

[etnlWings]

You'd think the existence of the 'open graphics stack' would be all the refutation required but apparently no.

[RealNC]

This was in response to various people claiming that the Linux driver model of requiring hardware vendors to open source their drivers and put them in the kernel is a good idea. When vendors don't do that, the next claim is that it's enough for them to open up their docs so that "the community will code the drivers and features."

It doesn't look that way. Proprietary drivers support GL3 for ages now, while the open driver stack is still based on old, outdated specs. IMO this is proof enough that the Linux driver model is wrong and its supporters too. Otherwise the open graphics stack would have been feature complete years ago.

[elanthis]

Nice! Maybe they'll catch up proprietary drivers' OpenGL support in about 2/3 years (If it doesn't appear a new OpenGL version until there...). But right now, Mesa is still a bit limited in some 3D OpenGL support...

Except there's a new OpenGL version roughly every 6 months, as of late.

The new compiler infrastructure should hopefully make it a lot easier to bring newer GLSL version online, at least.

[ModplanMan]

I guess this just proves that the argument of "if you give out docs, people will implement the features" of some Free Software lunatics is just wrong.

No one's going to code it in time. Money is still needed.

Erm, this post is an example of people implementing something because they have the docs. This has nothing to do with "free software lunatics" or any ideology, this has to do with multiple issues including expertise (the kind of things we're talking about are not particularly mainstream) and time (the the developers who focus on this have other things on their plate).

Though I'm not sure of anyone who says money doesn't help or is irrelevant, only that it is not the only motivation.

[RealNC]

I guess this just proves that the argument of "if you give out docs, people will implement the features" of some Free Software lunatics is just wrong.

No one's going to code it in time. Money is still needed.

[89c51]

off topic a bit

for such an important project in the Open Source ecosystem (from Linux to Haiku) Mesa/Gallium seems to me that it needs ALOT more people getting payed hacking features in it (state trackers etc)

and i don't think many companies put money in that part of Open Source

[evolution]

Nice! Maybe they'll catch up proprietary drivers' OpenGL support in about 2/3 years (If it doesn't appear a new OpenGL version until there...). But right now, Mesa is still a bit limited in some 3D OpenGL support...

Cheers!

[d2kx]

GLSL is the main thing that is behind for newer OpenGL support it seems. Also from what I hear S3TC is still a problem due to the patent situation.