Alright that's r300 and swr that are going to find a new home in the lts branch. Do any other gallium drivers want to join them?
Marek On Mon., Mar. 29, 2021, 13:51 Zielinski, Jan, <jan.zielin...@intel.com> wrote: > On Thursday, March 25, 2021 8:47 Marek Olšák wrote: > > Same thinking could be applied to other gallium drivers for old hardware > that don't receive new development and are becoming more and more > irrelevant every year due to their age. > > Can we also keep Gallium for OpenSWR driver on -lts branch? We currently > are focusing effort on other OSS projects, and want to maintain OpenSWR at > its current feature level, but we are often seeing Mesa core changes > causing problems in OpenSWR, that we can’t always address right away. So, > we would like to point our users to a stable branch, that limits the amount > of effort required for OpenSWR to support its existing users. > > Jan > > On Wed, Mar 24, 2021, at 09:15, Jason Ekstrand wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:28 AM Rob Clark <mailto:robdcl...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 3:15 PM Dylan Baker <mailto: > dy...@pnwbakers.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi list, > > > > > > > > We've talked about it a number of times, but I think it's time time > to > > > > discuss splitting the classic drivers off of the main development > branch > > > > again, although this time I have a concrete plan for how this would > > > > work. > > > > > > > > First, why? Basically, all of the classic drivers are in maintanence > > > > mode (even i965). Second, many of them rely on code that no one works > > > > on, and very few people still understand. There is no CI for most of > > > > them, and the Intel CI is not integrated with gitlab, so it's easy to > > > > unintentionally break them, and this breakage usually isn't noticed > > > > until just before or just after a release. 21.0 was held up (in small > > > > part, also me just getting behind) because of such breakages. > > > > > > > > I konw there is some interest in getting i915g in good enough shape > that > > > > it could replace i915c, at least for the common case. I also am aware > > > > that Dave, Ilia, and Eric (with some pointers from Ken) have been > > > > working on a gallium driver to replace i965. Neither of those things > are > > > > ready yet, but I've taken them into account. > > > > > > > > Here's the plan: > > > > > > > > 1) 21.1 release happens > > > > 2) we remove classic from master > > > > 3) 21.1 reaches EOL because of 21.2 > > > > 4) we fork the 21.1 branch into a "classic-lts"¹ branch > > > > 5) we disable all vulkan and gallium drivers in said branch, at > least at > > > > the Meson level > > > > > > I'm +1 for the -lts branch.. the layering between mesa "classic" and > > > gallium is already starting to get poked thru in the name of > > > performance, and we've already discovered cases of classic drivers > > > being broken for multiple months with no one noticing. I think a > > > slower moving -lts branch is the best approach to keeping things > > > working for folks with older hw. > > > > > > But possibly there is some value in not completely disabling gallium > > > completely in the -lts branch. We do have some older gallium drivers > > > which do not have CI coverage and I think are not used frequently by > > > developers who are tracking the latest main/master branch. I'm not > > > suggesting that we remove them from the main (non-lts) branch but it > > > might be useful to be able to recommend users of those drivers stick > > > with the -lts version for better stability? > > > > I agree with this. Generally, I don't think we should delete anything > > from the -lts branch. Doing so only risks more breakage. We probably > > want to change some meson build defaults to not build anything but old > > drivers but that's it. > > > > --Jason > > > > > BR, > > > -R > > > > > > > 6) We change the name and precidence of the glvnd loader file > > > > 7) apply any build fixups (turn of intel generators for versions >= > 7.5, > > > > for example > > > > 8) maintain that branch with build and critical bug fixes only > > > > > > > > This gives ditros and end users two options. > > > > 1) then can build *only* the legacy branch in the a normal Mesa > provides > > > > libGL interfaces fashion > > > > 2) They can use glvnd and install current mesa and the legacy branch > in > > > > parallel > > > > > > > > Because of glvnd, we can control which driver will get loaded first, > and > > > > thus if we decide i915g or the i965 replacement is ready and turn it > on > > > > by default it will be loaded by default. An end user who doesn't like > > > > this can add a new glvnd loader file that makes the classic drivers > > > > higher precident and continue to use them. > > > > > > > > Why fork from 21.1 instead of master? > > > > > > > > First, it allows us to delete classic immediately, which will allow > > > > refactoring to happen earlier in the cycle, and for any fallout to be > > > > caught and hopefully fixed before the release. Second, it means that > > > > when a user is switched from 21.1 to the new classic-lts branch, > there > > > > will be no regressions, and no one has to spend time figuring out > what > > > > broke and fixing the lts branch. > > > > > > > > When you say "build and critical bug fixes", what do you mean? > > > > > > > > I mean update Meson if we rely on something that in the future is > > > > deprecated and removed, and would prevent building the branch or an > > > > relying on some compiler behavior that changes, gaping exploitable > > > > security holes, that kind of thing. > > > > > > > > footnotes > > > > ¹Or whatever color you like your > bikeshed_______________________________________________ > > > > mesa-dev mailing list > > > > mailto:mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org > > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > > > mesa-dev mailing list > > > mailto:mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev > > > > -- > Dylan Baker > mailto:dy...@pnwbakers.com > _______________________________________________ > mesa-dev mailing list > mailto:mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev > Intel Technology Poland sp. z o.o. > ul. Sowackiego 173 | 80-298 Gdask | Sd Rejonowy Gdask Pnoc | VII Wydzia > Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sdowego - KRS 101882 | NIP 957-07-52-316 | > Kapita zakadowy 200.000 PLN. > Ta wiadomo wraz z zacznikami jest przeznaczona dla okrelonego adresata i > moe zawiera informacje poufne. W razie przypadkowego otrzymania tej > wiadomoci, prosimy o powiadomienie nadawcy oraz trwae jej usunicie; > jakiekolwiek przegldanie lub rozpowszechnianie jest zabronione. > This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the > sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended > recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies; any review or > distribution by others is strictly prohibited. >
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
