I would like to attract BOINC devs attention to this issue described here: http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=71192&postid=1357117
In short, current BOINC accelerator separation by vendor names is inappropriate and already caused issues. Type of accelerator API - that's what matters, not vendor name. If device supports few APIs it should be listed under all supported types. But different API should mean different type (it's possible/convenient to have few types for same API like in case of OpenCL, but in no circumstances different APIs should share same type as in the case of "ATI" type currently). _______________________________________________ boinc_dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
