On 12/08/2016 11:28 AM, Roland Scheidegger wrote: > I haven't seen the driver author's opinion on this yet, so it's probably > fair to give him some more time to answer. It's not like this is really > urgent...
Absolutely! > > Roland > > Am 08.12.2016 um 01:11 schrieb Edward O'Callaghan: >> Hi all, >> >> So I'll get right to the crux of this; In summary the consensus would >> then be to drop ilo? >> >> If so, I am not sure of this communities procedure? However, if it helps >> the patch is here: >> https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~funfunctor/mesa/log/?h=eol-ilo >> >> Kind Regards, >> Edward. >> >> On 12/07/2016 07:08 AM, Ilia Mirkin wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 3:00 PM, Rob Clark <robdcl...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net> >>>> wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 8:39 AM, Rob Clark <robdcl...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 8:42 AM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> On 6 December 2016 at 03:16, Edward O'Callaghan >>>>>>> <funfunc...@folklore1984.net> wrote: >>>>>>>> This patch is to potentially remove ourself from the maintaince >>>>>>>> burden of the ilo driver that appears to now be essentially >>>>>>>> unmaintained? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I am not sure of our policy here or if there are too many >>>>>>>> users so this patch is really only to gauge a response of >>>>>>>> how folks feel? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Surely you want to CC the core/sole developer of the driver when >>>>>>> considering its removal. >>>>>>> Maybe mailman was "nice" and hid his email in the header ;-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Either way adding Chia-I Wu to the list. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -Emil >>>>>>> P.S. Not sure/sold how much of an actual burden the driver is, yet I >>>>>>> don't make serious gallium infra changes. >>>>>> >>>>>> really hasn't been a problem for me.. >>>>>> >>>>>> That said, it would be nice if someday someone wired this up to use >>>>>> glsl_to_nir path in gallium and re-used i965's nir backend. I think >>>>>> that would make ilo somewhat more interesting.. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> We had a bit of a chat about this on IRC and what I told Ilia there was >>>>> that >>>>> the more interesting thing to do, if someone really wanted to do Intel on >>>>> gallium, would probably be to build a new driver based on ISL, blorp, the >>>>> i965 compiler, NIR, and genxml. We've made a pretty good driver-building >>>>> toolbox. Having an almost unmaintained driver that has it's own >>>>> hand-rolled >>>>> and inferrior compiler, surface layout, etc. isn't doing much good. >>>>> >>>> >>>> yeah, reusing the other bits would be nice too, and hopefully would be >>>> the long term goal if someone where to spend time on this.. I guess >>>> I'd prefer a more incremental approach of converting parts one by one >>>> if I were doing it myself. It's kind of a moot point either way until >>>> someone has time/motivation to spend on it. >>>> >>>> But I've no real objection to dropping ilo until then if others feel >>>> strongly.. it's still there in git history so it can be resurrected if >>>> someone wants to convert to reuse other i965 bits incrementally rather >>>> than starting from scratch. >>> >>> As mentioned on IRC, I think the real use-case that ilo could cover >>> that i965/anv can't (easily) handle is acting as a gallium-nine >>> backend. (I know someone's working on DX9 over vulkan, but that's >>> hardly ready, and will never be available on gen6.) >>> >>> However at this time, it's not sufficiently functional to handle >>> gallium-nine, so I don't see any serious downside to dropping it. >>> >>> -ilia >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mesa-dev mailing list >> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org >> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev >> >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
