Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 9th Sep 2009 22:29 UTC, submitted by lemur2
Linux Open source 3D graphics drivers for ATI R600 garphics cards has been submitted to the kernel-next tree for possible inclusion in the Linux kernel 2.6.32. "David Airlie has pushed a horde of new code into his drm-next Git tree, which is what will get pulled into the Linux 2.6.32 kernel once the merge window is open. Most prominently, this new DRM code brings support for kernel mode-setting with R600 class hardware as well as 3D support."
Thread beginning with comment 383354
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

Unecessarily pessimistic huh? I call it the plain truth. You can make all the pep-talk posts brimming with enthusiasm to osnews you like, but its not going to change the fact that ATI drivers have been 'coming soon' for years, that the 'about to be released' drivers are only basically functional, and that its taken years for intel drivers, with intel support to get from 'basically functional to fully functional and now back to basically functional. I'll believe it when i see it. I'll believe that open source ATI drivers will support full speed XRender, GLSL and OpenGL 2+ functionality crash free and glitch free along with accelerated video playback on Linux when i see it working. So why don't you calm down. When that day comes, i'll be able to forget my pessimism, and you'll actually have something to crow about.


Pffft.

You can't dismiss code until you have seen it, run it and measured it.

This driver is entirely new code. It is not fglrx. It is not a re-vamped version of the older reverse-engineerd open source drivers. It is the first 2D/3D accelerated graphics driver for Linux written by Linux developers with the aid of specifcations.

Lets wait and see how this entirely new code performs when it is made available. It is in the kernel staging area, but that means it has a lot of hardening and stability testing to get through yet.

Once we actually have a released driver, and we can objectively measure its performance, then and only then can we talk about the "plain truth" about it.

PS: ATI open source drivers have not been in work "for years". The specs were only released to open source developers in January of this year.

Edited 2009-09-11 00:45 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

IkeKrull Member since:
2006-01-24

From David Airlie, the guy who committed the code:

"It may not be 100% stable yet and I'm sure we can make things a lot faster, but the basics all work for me here."

So these drivers are an initial release - basically functional, but may crash, and are slow.

But sure, ignore the plain truth all you like, you're way out in irrational fanboy territory here.

Reply Parent Score: 1

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

From David Airlie, the guy who committed the code: "It may not be 100% stable yet and I'm sure we can make things a lot faster, but the basics all work for me here." So these drivers are an initial release - basically functional, but may crash, and are slow. But sure, ignore the plain truth all you like, you're way out in irrational fanboy territory here.


Cute.

I'm supposed to be the one who is "in irrational territory" ... even though I posted this:

Lets wait and see how this entirely new code performs when it is made available. It is in the kernel staging area, but that means it has a lot of hardening and stability testing to get through yet.


and you are the one who came up with the topic of this sub-thread:

Only one choice for solid 3D under Linux - Nvidia


... and yet I'm allegedly the one who is a "fanboy"?

Get real.

There is a word for this type of behaviour:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

Reply Parent Score: 2

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

From David Airlie, the guy who committed the code: "It may not be 100% stable yet and I'm sure we can make things a lot faster, but the basics all work for me here." So these drivers are an initial release - basically functional, but may crash, and are slow. But sure, ignore the plain truth all you like, you're way out in irrational fanboy territory here.


"May not be 100% stable yet" means that there is still testing to be done, it doesn't mean that it is necessarily buggy.

"I'm sure we can make things a lot faster" means it probably hasn't been profiled and optimised, it doesn't mean that it is slow.

I posted earlier quoting other testers on the Phoronix radeon forum ... it was decribed as "fast and stable" for them.

So your description that it will be "basically functional, but may crash, and are slow" is purely wishful thinking on your part.

"ignore the plain truth all you like"


I gave direct quotes from independent people who have run David's code. They found it to be QUOTE: "fast and stable". QUOTE: "stabilizing quickly". QUOTE: "I am *still* surprised how well it all came together." You are just guessing and speculating about it, and badmouthing it before it has even been through staging.

What precisely is your agenda here?

Edited 2009-09-11 04:42 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2