Google Still Doesn't Trust Linux GPU Drivers Enough To Enable Chrome Video Acceleration

[chithanh]

I can totally understand that Google will not yet enable video acceleration. Especially with older AMD cards, this may lead to GPU hang or even complete system lockup (see https://bugs.freedesktop.org/ for many reports).

I understand that AMD has made a limited effort for UVD support on pre-GCN, and no intention to invest into getting video decode to work properly in these old GPUs. But at least until a way to quickly and gracefully handle UVD-induced lockups is implemented, enabling it by default in Chromium has the potential to upset many users.

Unlike Linux. Look at the shitfest when Ryzen was released. Windows users had 0 problems on launch day; Linux users had to put up with black screens and kernels panicking on boot.

0 problems? Your memory is failing you.
Performance was bad, Windows was crashing, and generally things were miserable until Microsoft's next Windows 10 release.
This repeated with release of Threadripper that same year.

And it is not that Microsoft fixed things for good. With the recent 2990WX launch, we saw again horrible performance in Windows where Linux would just perform fine (7-zip, Indigo, etc.).

And don't believe for a second that this was somehow new or limited to AMD. As you seem to be familiar with Windows, maybe you remember the AMD Dual-Core Optimizer. Or how Chromium developers' systems would grind to a halt when running builds on a 24-core system.

[dungeon]

I can totally understand that Google will not yet enable video acceleration. Especially with older AMD cards, this may lead to GPU hang or even complete system lockup (see https://bugs.freedesktop.org/ for many reports).

I understand that AMD has made a limited effort for UVD support on pre-GCN, and no intention to invest into getting video decode to work properly in these old GPUs. But at least until a way to quickly and gracefully handle UVD-induced lockups is implemented, enabling it by default in Chromium has the potential to upset many users.

AMD started doing UVD on opensource driver since year 2013. AFAIR, so before are not so much in luck . On the safe side Google could enable it, for anything that uses amdgpu driver so for 2014. hardware and up, i mean GCN 1.2+.

I even think AMD will drop support on WIndows for these earliest GCNs very soon That info might draw a line among users and companies what is really supported

[ms178]

That is another mess that AMD created with (non)supporting GCN 1.0/1.1 with several drivers, radeon or amdgpu or fglrx or amdgpu-pro or ...

Users of these have minimum four heads



Of course they are right, just look of just that AMD drivers situation for the same GCN 1.0/1.1 hardware - these are glorous example of a mess

How they can enable anything for one same hardware with so many drivers combos and versions on all supported distros, it is mission impossible

Also GCN1.0/1.1 are not just one or two hardware envoroments, there were about 150 ASICs of these (OK, some minority of that did not had UVD) So works for me, does not work here... as you need at least plain majority to prove it working, preferably even above 90% so we can claim some sort of perfection

To ignore mess, maybe GCN 1.2+ could be more clearly targeted here as they only do amdgpu... but that is short so just 4+ year old hardware He, he, and some 1.2 were supported by FGLRX yeah, so no So no, maybe just 1.3+ but these are just new ones, still sold... OK just forget about anything

I don't get it, where is the problem when this feature is hidden behind an experimental flag? It signals to the user: You can use it, but at your own risk and don't count on us fixing things. If there were a problem the user could report it anyway to AMD or Google and if there were enough complaints there could be some motivation to fix it. If not, they are out of luck. But now anyone doesn't even get the benefit of it working on a large subset of GFX chips.

Google's statement boils down to: We don't want to share ANY burden of this. Let downstream deal with this mess. I've stated my point clearly in that bug report, this is a short sighted and unacceptable decision, denying access to this feature on totally capable and stable systems. Of course I do own a notebook with a Sandy Bridge HD 3000 + AMD 6770M combination where at least the HD 3000 works fine with a patched Chromium (did not test it with the AMD card as I use the power saving GPU fur this purpose anyway). This decision heavily influences my choice of which distribution I need to choose for a great experience. Every distro without an easy way to get a patched package is out of the race, thus limiting my options.

[andreano]

Chicken-and-egg situation:

Nobody uses the drivers.
↑ ↓
Nobody needs to fix the drivers.

[johnc]

Once again, nobody in the Linux community cares about the end-user experience.

[DanL]

That's all true except that even nVidia's proprietary driver supports va-api through a translation.

It supports VA-API with a VDPAU backend with the old wrapper from Splitted Desktop. I'm not aware of any VA-API -> NVDEC method. Do you have a link?

[birdie]

Don't waste yours precious time on birdie

https://www.phoronix.com/forums/foru...karounds/page9

Still boasting your utter scumbag behavior (citing private correspondence and shit)? Wow, didn't know anyone could take pride in that but surely you do. Apparently there are many Phoronix readers who also condone that. What a company of deviants you've got here. Luckily I don't give a fuck about. There are pieces of shit everywhere and you enjoy being the leader of the shit movement.

[dungeon]

I don't get it, where is the problem when this feature is hidden behind an experimental flag?

Ha, ha, that is how things usually begins, with something hidden as experimental flag, blah, blah...

Sooner or later more and more people would think how they support this, but they don't and that is a problem for them

[birdie]

Once again, nobody in the Linux community cares about the end-user experience.

Here, at Phoronix most people believe that Linux is perfect and they turn a blind eye on any of its issues. No video HW acceleration in web browsers? "Not our issue! It's this and that to blame while everything in Linux is a great shape and form".

[DanL]

Here, at Phoronix most people believe that Linux is perfect and they turn a blind eye on any of its issues. No video HW acceleration in web browsers? "Not our issue! It's this and that to blame while everything in Linux is a great shape and form".

If you really feel that way, do us a favor and find the nearest exit, and you and johnc can hold hands on the way out. Quit trolling and derailing threads.