Linked by Hadrien Grasland on Thu 13th Jan 2011 17:13 UTC, submitted by Michael
Linux "Now that the kernel mode-setting page-flipping for the ATI Radeon DRM kernel module has been merged into the Linux 2.6.38 kernel and the respective bits have been set in the xf86-video-ati DDX, we're in the process of running new open-source ATI graphics benchmarks under Linux. Our initial results (included in this article) show these latest improvements to cause some major performance boosts for the open-source ATI driver as it nears the level of performance of the proprietary Catalyst driver."
Permalink for comment 457898
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: great
by lucas_maximus on Fri 14th Jan 2011 13:41 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: great"
Member since:

Stable in-kernel AP/BI isn't gonna happen in the mainline Linux kernel, ever. It's logistically infeasible and most kernel developers would swear by the ability to change APIs as development progresses.

Constantly having to change an interface reeks of poor software design.

The whole point of an interface is that it stays the same and the implementation behind it changes.

What's possible and actually being done is maintaining stable ABI in the same distro release and for enterprise products this often can span many years. In that respect, it isn't too different from commercial operating systems.

Enterprise != My Desktop/Laptop.

If for whatever reason stable ABI is a must for you (it escapes me why it would even matter for usual desktop users tho), go ahead and use something else.

So according to your logic it is acceptable for a desktop machines for hardware to stop working after an update (which does happen).

A driver released 10 years ago for Windows XP will still work with Windows XP Service Pack 3 with all the latest updated ... In fact I am using Windows 2000 drivers on my old laptop because there are no Windows XP drivers for it ... The Interface has stayed the same therefore the older code still works.

Quit whining about something which isn't feasible.

It is feasible. The Kernel maintainers have the power to do this anytime they want.

Anyway none of this changed my original point. If there was a Stable ABI, less effort would have to spent on hardware support whether that code was open or closed since code doesn't have to be constantly changed.

Reply Parent Score: 2