Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Heterogeneous Memory Management Is Still Planning For Linux 4.12

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

  • #11
    Originally posted by Hi-Angel View Post
    The EGLStreams vs GBM dispute ended up in acknowledging that both have some flaws, and deciding to create a new Unix Device Memory Allocator, which for some reason has no activity since the last year, as of writing these words.
    Probably because Gnome caved in and started supporting EGLStreams.
    I don't mind, KDE is unlikely to cave in like that, and most other DEs lack manpower to do it at all.

    It will be funny when the only DE working in Wayland on NVIDIA will be GNOME.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
      Probably because Gnome caved in and started supporting EGLStreams.
      I don't mind, KDE is unlikely to cave in like that, and most other DEs lack manpower to do it at all.

      It will be funny when the only DE working in Wayland on NVIDIA will be GNOME.
      Well, it explains why e.g. Red Hat don't push it, however it doesn't explain why NVidia not creating discussions/patches/etc for further development of the new API.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by Hi-Angel View Post
        Well, it explains why e.g. Red Hat don't push it, however it doesn't explain why NVidia not creating discussions/patches/etc for further development of the new API.
        GNOME is default DE on enterprise linuxes, on computing systems you don't even have a DE anyway, so I assume they feel like that's good enough.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
          Yes it would, and no it would not be funny.
          We aren't talking of a leaf like a file system or a GPU driver that are modules, but of a core kernel feature, if this causes instability it will cause instability for all, not for a subset of users.

          For testing new stuff there are branches and kernel patches and custom kernels, there is no real reason to impose high risks like this on everyone for the sake of development. This is Linux, not Windows 10.
          i run a custom kernel. I dont mind too much if my entire system blows up. As i said, if you want stability you run a LTS version of a distro.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by cj.wijtmans View Post
            i run a custom kernel. I dont mind too much if my entire system blows up. As i said, if you want stability you run a LTS version of a distro.
            So, why are you advocating to merge potentially dangerous changes to mainline again?
            You can use custom kernels to test new and potentially dangerous stuff anyway, why fucking everyone for the sake of testing like Windows 10 does?
            It will be merged when it is ready.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by cj.wijtmans View Post

              i run a custom kernel. I dont mind too much if my entire system blows up. As i said, if you want stability you run a LTS version of a distro.
              That LTS thing is really just bullshit, or at-least it is with Ubuntu. 14.04 had some unfortunate bugs, and 15.04 was much more stable.

              Now I use Manjaro, which keeps the software way more up-to-date than Ubuntu. Ubuntu claims that the slow releases make it more stable as there's more time for "testing", but Manjaro has actually been less buggy for me. In one Ubuntu version, I found that Audacity and about 3 other audio programs I used (from the main stable repositories) didn't work because they weren't compiled correctly for that new Ubuntu version, and the problem remained next release 6 months later.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by Electric-Gecko View Post

                That LTS thing is really just bullshit, or at-least it is with Ubuntu. 14.04 had some unfortunate bugs, and 15.04 was much more stable.

                Now I use Manjaro, which keeps the software way more up-to-date than Ubuntu. Ubuntu claims that the slow releases make it more stable as there's more time for "testing", but Manjaro has actually been less buggy for me. In one Ubuntu version, I found that Audacity and about 3 other audio programs I used (from the main stable repositories) didn't work because they weren't compiled correctly for that new Ubuntu version, and the problem remained next release 6 months later.
                Yeah. IIRC it was the main reason for KDE folks to make KDE Neon, even though there was Kubuntu.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by Electric-Gecko View Post
                  That LTS thing is really just bullshit, or at-least it is with Ubuntu. 14.04 had some unfortunate bugs, and 15.04 was much more stable.
                  He is talking of LTS kernels, that's done by the kernel people, not by downstream distros.

                  I also tend to agree on the Ubuntu's idea of LTS distro is bullshit, OpenSUSE has a much less stupid approach to making an "LTS" distro (keeping kernel and crucial userspace stuff frozen for a year while keeping updated browsers and other programs that need to be up-to-date).

                  I found that Audacity and about 3 other audio programs I used (from the main stable repositories) didn't work because they weren't compiled correctly for that new Ubuntu version, and the problem remained next release 6 months later.
                  This is a plain bad job of Ubuntu distro maintainers, it's not related to LTS or whatever.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    I just wonder why Michael is still using Ubuntu as his distro of choice for Phoronix testing. He tends to update software (such as MESA) to the cutting-edge latest, which Ubuntu isn't very suited for. Maybe he thinks he's representing his readers better by using a popular distro, but that doesn't apply when the system is so heavily modified by all this unstable software. But that's why I created this thread (and poll).
                    Although Phoronix covers news on all things Linux, and occasionally other OS's, Ubuntu remains to be the main distro of choice for running tests (as you can see in

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
                      So, why are you advocating to merge potentially dangerous changes to mainline again?
                      You can use custom kernels to test new and potentially dangerous stuff anyway, why fucking everyone for the sake of testing like Windows 10 does?
                      It will be merged when it is ready.
                      whats the point of patching something in that wont be used makes no sense.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X