CoreCtrl 1.4 Brings Radeon RX 7000 Series Fan Curve Controls, Intel CPU Temperatures

[NeoMorpheus]

I'd rather have them invest more in core driver stack than a gimmicky UI nonsense. Simple CLI tool or config file for configuring high level GPU features is enough. For me anyway.

Sadly for you, Linux is moving away from the elitist realm, so sooner rather than later will get more proper GUI oriented user friendly menus.

[NeoMorpheus]

I wouldn't put it past patent holders to explicitly deny licenses for usage on Linux, though this might not last very long given the markets such as embedded, entertainment systems, handheld gaming, etc are either already Linux dominated or moving into that direction

Given the free passes that Ngreedia gets with all their antifoss actions in these parts, maybe the same group would accept an AMD binary blob including those things that cannot be open sourced as an optional installation.

[anda_skoa]

Given the free passes that Ngreedia gets with all their antifoss actions in these parts, maybe the same group would accept an AMD binary blob including those things that cannot be open sourced as an optional installation.

This might already be the case.
If you read through the rather informative "rant" by skeevy420 it says "their Pro tools and drivers only work on Ubuntu, SLED, and RHEL (Scroll to the bottom)".
Which is usually an indication for proprietary and binary-only software which can only be verified to work on a small subset of systems.

[Jaxad0127]

Sadly for you, Linux is moving away from the elitist realm, so sooner rather than later will get more proper GUI oriented user friendly menus.

I'm with them. I'd rather see the options exposed for others to use rather than restricted to a proprietary UI from AMD. Let the community do cool stuff!

[skeevy420]

Nothing wrong with a bit of ranting if it contains so much valuable information

I tried to leave it as clean and to the point as I could.

On one hand I can see the value of having explicit information on feature support, on the other hand it might deter potential customers who might not even need those.

Having a special Linux page shouldn't detract Windows-only customers.

I can also imagine that it would be a somewhat moving target if it depends on version combinations of maybe components (driver, kernel, OS release, Mesa, etc.)
It could end up with dozens or even hundreds of footnote numbers instead of simple "supported on Linux" asterisks.
You'd probably need structured data and a query/filter interface to be actually useful for an end user.

From what I can surmise, there are only three reasons: Window Managers, Proprietary, and We Haven't Done It Yet (like Chill).

Right. As I said before the absence of the Adrenaline suite is more likely caused by the need to keep this blurriness than any specific technology's requirements.

A sort of "unfortunate ambiguity" that allows the to plan their priorities rather than having them "dictated" by bad publicity.

I think it's more along the lines of corporate culture not fully prioritizing Linux and them just doing the same ole, same ole since AMD fully got their grip into the graphics team and set their ways in stone. We're talking about a product page format that hasn't been changed for a long time. AMD/ATi used to have an entire page dedicated to footnotes and asterisks until they changed to the current format 4 or 5 years after the AMD takeover.

For example allowing them to prioritize features needed by Steam Deck over AI.
If Valve (and their customers) are happy, the next iteration will again be designed around AMD.
The AI market is much harder and would require much more effort because Nvidia had such a head start.

Just a guess obviously

To me, the Steam Deck is an odd one to use because Valve has been implementing things that AMD's Adrenaline does, but only for Valve's hardware. IMHO, the Steam Deck is the best example as to why AMD needs to address the GUI and feature parity with Windows issues because hardware like this further fragments where and how you can do things on AMD hardware. Open yet restricted to specific hardware with a specific OS is just par for the course with AMD and it sucks.

As far as the rest, the AI market complaining about ROCm and the Pro stack in regards to selling hardware for doing AI work is what is going to get the ball moving to make AMD's Linux software just as accessible as NVIDIA's Linux software. They're complaining about this just as much as us forum folks are. Geohot and the tiny corp has been tweeting about it for a while now, including today. Ironically, they're willing to leave open driver AMD for closed driver NVIDIA because at least closed driver NVIDIA has reproducible builds with their black boxes. AMD makes great hardware and their software sucks. If you only play games you'd maybe never know.

I wonder if third party review sites like Phoronix could compile and update such a thing

Yes. That's a silly statement to make. Accounting for research, I could do it myself within a few days if it's limited to just what AMD supports. What would be hard would be keeping up with open source projects and how to use them. That'd be a full time job in and of itself.

My guess is the former rather than the latter.

So much of it happened a few years after the ATi takeover that, to me, it gives the feeling that changes were made for the sake of flexing power and that the people in charge aren't necessarily open to criticism. It also happened around the same time when the old FGLRX Proprietary Linux driver was dropped and AMDGPU/AMDGPU-Pro came out. FGLRX and AMDGPU-Pro are the same in that they had fixed places and software that they're used with. AMDGPU is just everywhere with all software and distributions. It's like they're still thinking in the old ways and that in itself its own form of incompetence.

Impressive list, thank you!
Have to admit I hadn't even heard about some of those before

Can you clarify what you mean with "we don't have them on Linux" as some of the items seem to mention Linux implementations?

I rewrote that post 2 or 3 times and lost clarity there. I should have said something like "why we don't have everything on Linux" or "why we don't have all of these on Linux".

Maybe that has already sufficiently good enough support through 3rd party tools?

Ironically, that's been said to me and pissed me off. I said it in my first post of this thread and probably pissed someone else off. We're talking about all this in a thread about one of those good enough 3rd party tools. Nothing about graphics on Linux is ideal. AMD, Intel, or NVIDIA. None of them are perfect. Especially for professional users:

NVIDIA has the best software and software availability, but it's closed. Their hardware is the most expensive even though it doesn't always perform the best dollar for dollar with the competition. People pay a premium to get NVIDIA's industry leading software.

Intel also has industry leading software and they're mostly open source, too. Their graphics hardware...ehhhhh...it's not the best. It's No. 1 displayer of potassium. Other graphics cards display inferior potassium. All their companies are ran by little girls.

AMD has OK software with the worst availability. Their hardware can be the best on paper and will trades blows with NVIDIA, but the software isn't that great nor does it run everywhere like Intel and NVIDIA software. They really need to worry about Intel getting their graphics hardware kinks worked out.

IMHO, tools like Corectrl, Adriconf, and desktop environment system settings existing isn't a good reason for AMD to make OK software with the worst availability.

I wouldn't put it past patent holders to explicitly deny licenses for usage on Linux, though this might not last very long given the markets such as embedded, entertainment systems, handheld gaming, etc are either already Linux dominated or moving into that direction

Same here. I really wish there was an one-off place I could just go and buy my own personal licenses for codecs. I'm laughing at the thought of a DRM for the DRM and all the confusion that'll happen on that kernel mailing list...digital rights/direct rendering...A manager for the manager. Karen's and Xzibit's heads would explode.

[Panix]

Sadly for you, Linux is moving away from the elitist realm, so sooner rather than later will get more proper GUI oriented user friendly menus.

LMAO!!!!!

[Panix]

Given the free passes that Ngreedia gets with all their antifoss actions in these parts, maybe the same group would accept an AMD binary blob including those things that cannot be open sourced as an optional installation.

AMD gpus can't utilize hdmi 2.1 in Linux and have some Mickey Mouse display port connection juggling and also have no reliable method to undervolt or obtain fan control with recent gen gpus - but, yes, this is THE YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP! lmao!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

AMD's developers and partners were assuring ppl that it was a kernel issue - but, now that kernel 6.8 is out and the next one is being worked on - this situation doesn't sound any better.

[anda_skoa]

I tried to leave it as clean and to the point as I could.

I definitely learned a lot.

Having a special Linux page shouldn't detract Windows-only customers.

Agreed, but I was thinking about potential Linux customers.
People who look for compatibility information rather than just buying something from a vendor that certifies Linux compatibility.

Of course it would be nice if such information existed, was accurate and up to date, most other vendors don't really do that either.

Back in the day when I had a laptop with an Nvidia GPU their website did not mention it would make it impossible to resume after sleep.
Which is a much more central feature on a laptop than any of the not yet supported things we are discussing for AMD.

From what I can surmise, there are only three reasons: Window Managers, Proprietary, and We Haven't Done It Yet (like Chill).

The reasons might be only few, but their eventual solution might have a much larger matrix of dependencies.

"We haven't done it yet" would likely be a simple kernel version the foot note could point to.

"Window Managers", on the other hand, would likely consist of at least the various versions of those products, but very likely also versions of libraries like Mesa or even kernel versions.
What would the foot note point to that isn't a table with all kinds of combinations?
Or a query/filter interface on a database in which you could enter your values and get a "supported/unsupported" answer.

An again, of course it would be great to have that, I am just saying this is likely much more effort than a simple asterisk

To me, the Steam Deck is an odd one to use because Valve has been implementing things that AMD's Adrenaline does, but only for Valve's hardware.

I've not followed these developments very closely, but I think I've read things being improved upstream on several occassions.

I do agree that AMD could probably have done this generically in the first place.

As far as the rest, the AI market complaining about ROCm and the Pro stack in regards to selling hardware for doing AI work is what is going to get the ball moving to make AMD's Linux software just as accessible as NVIDIA's Linux software.

Yes, definitely something they need to look into.

The point I was trying to make was more along the lines of "if resources are limited it might make sense to address needs of an existing product and consumers before addressing a new market".
Of course the better option would be to increase the resources to do both.

What would be hard would be keeping up with open source projects and how to use them. That'd be a full time job in and of itself.

Indeed. Unfortunately likely one of the reasons AMD does not put that effort into their website either.

Would be great though, regardless of who does it

I rewrote that post 2 or 3 times and lost clarity there. I should have said something like "why we don't have everything on Linux" or "why we don't have all of these on Linux".

Ah, ok, that makes sense. Thanks.
More along "incomplete support" than "no support".

IMHO, tools like Corectrl, Adriconf, and desktop environment system settings existing isn't a good reason for AMD to make OK software with the worst availability.

Absolutely!
I didn't mean to suggest they wouldn't have to do anything. Just that I can see how the existence of such tools would reduce the priority of AMD to do their equivalent essentially again.
But even in that case they could be helping by providing explicit API (assuming that the 3rd party tools currently need to resort to talking to the driver or even device nodes).

[NeoMorpheus]

I'm with them. I'd rather see the options exposed for others to use rather than restricted to a proprietary UI from AMD. Let the community do cool stuff!

Where exactly did I said that the CLI option should be removed?

[NeoMorpheus]

AMD gpus can't utilize hdmi 2.1 in Linux and have some Mickey Mouse display port connection juggling and also have no reliable method to undervolt or obtain fan control with recent gen gpus - but, yes, this is THE YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP! lmao!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

AMD's developers and partners were assuring ppl that it was a kernel issue - but, now that kernel 6.8 is out and the next one is being worked on - this situation doesn't sound any better.

Man, people do like to always blame AMD. They cant utilize HDMI 2.1 ports because the HDMI Forum decided to fuck with open source.

https://www.phoronix.com/news/HDMI-Closed-Spec-Hurts-Open