Bug#639621: libgl1-mesa-dri: A DRI1-capable r300_dri.so should be provided
On Son, 2011-08-28 at 13:16 -0500, Andrew Deason wrote: 1. Just install the non-Gallium r300_dri.so instead of the Gallium one (I assume you don't want to do this, since the Gallium driver is deliberately chosen, and for all I know is much better on other systems) 2. Install the non-Gallium r300_dri.so under another name (r300dri1_dri.so or something?), and get the 'radeon' X driver in xserver-xorg-video-ati to report r300dri1 as the DRI driver name for DRI1. Currently it reports r300_dri.so for both DRI1 and DRI2 (see src/radeon_dri.c and R300_DRIVER_NAME in xserver-xorg-video-ati). 3. Allow the user to choose between the Gallium and non-Gallium drivers via the alternatives system, or via installing a package that diverts r300_dri.so, or something along those lines. 4. Make the Gallium r300 driver support both DRI1 and DRI2. I assume this is difficult and not a feasible short-term option, or it deliberately does not support DRI1. None of these options are particularly attractive, but a simpler solution might be possible: Install the classic r300_dri.so to a different directory, and add that to the end of the default driver search path. That way libGL would try r300g first and fall back to the classic driver. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.amd.com Libre software enthusiast | Debian, X and DRI developer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-x-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1314600955.31972.36.camel@thor.local
Bug#639621: libgl1-mesa-dri: A DRI1-capable r300_dri.so should be provided
On Son, 2011-08-28 at 13:16 -0500, Andrew Deason wrote: On my system, using KMS and DRI2 is really slow (this is known in at least some cases; KMS/DRI2 just isn't as mature right now, I think? See 572911, 607510, and probably others). So, I have disabled KMS and just want to use regular DRI, which is currently much better. The problem is, the r300_dri.so that is shipped with libgl1-mesa-dri is the Gallium driver (I have a Radeon X1300, which uses r300_dri.so). This only works with DRI2, so all of the 3d rendering is done via swrast_dri.so. The performance isn't bad (still much better than KMS), but if I build libgl1-mesa-dri locally, and grab the non-Gallium r300_dri.so I get better performance since I'm no longer rendering via software. And to reiterate on what Cyril said: If the Gallium driver is slower than swrast_dri.so (doing what?), that sounds like something very basic is going wrong, and you should really look into that. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.amd.com Libre software enthusiast | Debian, X and DRI developer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-x-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1314602587.31972.41.camel@thor.local
Bug#639621: libgl1-mesa-dri: A DRI1-capable r300_dri.so should be provided
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 09:23:07 +0200 Michel Dänzer daen...@debian.org wrote: And to reiterate on what Cyril said: If the Gallium driver is slower than swrast_dri.so (doing what?) Everything. As in, including basic drawing of windows (which I assume is something with KMS or the radeon driver or... I dunno yet); you don't need to tell me twice that something's wrong. But I don't want to clutter this bug with that issue. that sounds like something very basic is going wrong, and you should really look into that. Yes, I will, but I'd spent enough time on this that weekend :) I just had a local solution going so my machine was at least usable in the meantime, and was hoping to share that with other users using the same packages. If the way forward is KMS/DRI2, that's fine, but it's just going to take me a little longer to look into. -- Andrew Deason adea...@dson.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-x-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110829184336.54f375da3453fa0a6bd23...@dson.org
Bug#639621: libgl1-mesa-dri: A DRI1-capable r300_dri.so should be provided
Package: libgl1-mesa-dri Version: 7.11-4 On my system, using KMS and DRI2 is really slow (this is known in at least some cases; KMS/DRI2 just isn't as mature right now, I think? See 572911, 607510, and probably others). So, I have disabled KMS and just want to use regular DRI, which is currently much better. The problem is, the r300_dri.so that is shipped with libgl1-mesa-dri is the Gallium driver (I have a Radeon X1300, which uses r300_dri.so). This only works with DRI2, so all of the 3d rendering is done via swrast_dri.so. The performance isn't bad (still much better than KMS), but if I build libgl1-mesa-dri locally, and grab the non-Gallium r300_dri.so I get better performance since I'm no longer rendering via software. I think libgl1-mesa-dri should provide the non-Gallium r300_dri.so somewhere. It doesn't need to be the default, but it should be an option. I see a few ways to do this: 1. Just install the non-Gallium r300_dri.so instead of the Gallium one (I assume you don't want to do this, since the Gallium driver is deliberately chosen, and for all I know is much better on other systems) 2. Install the non-Gallium r300_dri.so under another name (r300dri1_dri.so or something?), and get the 'radeon' X driver in xserver-xorg-video-ati to report r300dri1 as the DRI driver name for DRI1. Currently it reports r300_dri.so for both DRI1 and DRI2 (see src/radeon_dri.c and R300_DRIVER_NAME in xserver-xorg-video-ati). 3. Allow the user to choose between the Gallium and non-Gallium drivers via the alternatives system, or via installing a package that diverts r300_dri.so, or something along those lines. 4. Make the Gallium r300 driver support both DRI1 and DRI2. I assume this is difficult and not a feasible short-term option, or it deliberately does not support DRI1. I'm not sure which way sounds the best to you. In the meantime, I'm just locally diverting r300_dri.so. -- Andrew Deason adea...@dson.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-x-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110828131622.1b8825dbccd5406e0062d...@dson.org
Bug#639621: closed by Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org (Re: Bug#639621: libgl1-mesa-dri: A DRI1-capable r300_dri.so should be provided)
On Sun, 28 Aug 2011 18:57:14 + ow...@bugs.debian.org (Debian Bug Tracking System) wrote: That's something we're not keen on doing, at all. Alternatives or diversions mean users are going to get broken stuff at some point, and concentrating on getting the Gallium drivers to work is something which looks like a better idea. Fine, but is the Gallium driver ever going to support DRI1? Currently the radeon X driver reports that r300_dri.so should be used when DRI is requested, which is wrong; currently that will not work at all. Will it in the future? -- Andrew Deason adea...@dson.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-x-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110828140526.84ba91c93a653a2d0f2c1...@dson.org
Bug#639621: closed by Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org (Re: Bug#639621: libgl1-mesa-dri: A DRI1-capable r300_dri.so should be provided)
Andrew Deason adea...@dson.org (28/08/2011): Fine, but is the Gallium driver ever going to support DRI1? Currently the radeon X driver reports that r300_dri.so should be used when DRI is requested, which is wrong; currently that will not work at all. Will it in the future? I think you want to ask that on mesa-dev@, where knowledgeable people live. Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#639621: closed by Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org (Re: Bug#639621: libgl1-mesa-dri: A DRI1-capable r300_dri.so should be provided)
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 14:05:26 -0500, Andrew Deason wrote: On Sun, 28 Aug 2011 18:57:14 + ow...@bugs.debian.org (Debian Bug Tracking System) wrote: That's something we're not keen on doing, at all. Alternatives or diversions mean users are going to get broken stuff at some point, and concentrating on getting the Gallium drivers to work is something which looks like a better idea. Fine, but is the Gallium driver ever going to support DRI1? Currently No, dri1 is dead. Cheers, Julien -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-x-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110828195426.gh2...@radis.liafa.jussieu.fr
