On Friday 04 February 2005 16:17, Roland Scheidegger wrote:>
Direct3D drivers are not really an apples-to-apples comparison since they'll try to factor out as many conditionals as possible for that last 0.03fps in 3dmark. fglrx is probably a more fair comparison, and fglrx covers r200 through r400 no problem. If we assume that that's the more maintainable solution from ATI's perspective, I have trouble seeing how distinct drivers would be more maintainable for us.
As an example of what the non-unified road looks like, look at the glide source. Despite successive chips being pretty much strict supersets in terms of functionality, they clone the entire tree for each chip. I suspect the effort required to keep drivers unified is worth it in the long run.
the way I see it is that there needs very good reasons for merging drivers. not just for the sake of merging.
My understanding is that r200 and r300 have very different interfaces. You only improve maintainability for code shared between the drivers.
So the question should be how much are the drivers alike.
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc. Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list Dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
