On 7 June 2017 at 21:54, Marek Olšák <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 2:07 AM, Marek Olšák <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 12:21 AM, Samuel Li <[email protected]> wrote: >>> @@ -790,6 +790,15 @@ static const char* r600_get_device_vendor(struct >>> pipe_screen* pscreen) >>> >>> static const char* r600_get_chip_name(struct r600_common_screen *rscreen) >>> { >>> + const char *mname; >>> + >>> + if (rscreen->ws->get_chip_name) { >>> + mname = rscreen->ws->get_chip_name(rscreen->ws); >>> + if (mname != NULL) >>> + return mname; >>> + } >>> + >>> + /* fall back to family names*/ >>> switch (rscreen->info.family) { >>> case CHIP_R600: return "AMD R600"; >>> case CHIP_RV610: return "AMD RV610";
As someone downstream of this, I have to say I find the "family" names much more informative than whatever marketing came up with. More importantly however, this commit changes the GL_RENDERER string reported to applications, like Wine, for existing GPUs in an incompatible way. Since I suspect displaying the "marketing" name is important to at least some people at AMD, could I request please including the family name as well, as is done by for example lspci? _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
