Nightwulf|work: hi all
udovdh: would I be able to play quake on my rv635-equipped PC under Linux?
udovdh: (assuming I can find the source etc)
udovdh: or do i need extra features in the driver?
udovdh: same for tuxracer?
udovdh: Please comment, possibly with a tentative timeline
ndim: udovdh: You need mesa/DRI for 3D.
ndim: udovdh: Speaking of the devil... :)
bridgman: udovdh; today you would have to use the binary driver (fglrx); last I heard that seemed to work fine with Quake
udovdh: ah. hmmm
udovdh: bridgman, you have the inside knowledge, any conservative estimate on 3d for rv63x ?
udovdh: 2nd q 2009?
bridgman: we have a pretty detailed work breakdown for mesa (ie a big heap of guesses ;)) 6xx/7xx support, then subtracting out what has been done today and assuming just the developers who are already working on it my guess is April-ish to get 3d support up to the same level as we have on 5xx
bridgman: if other developers are able to pile in then it could be sooner
udovdh: so indeed 2q 2009. ok... thanks for the scoop
udovdh: but maybe testing in an earlier time frame?
ndim: Those "other developers" would come from where (or would you rather not say)?
bridgman: absolutely; probably functionality will show up in three stages; basic (glxgears), textures etc... (possibly compiz), and arb_fp/vp support (remainder of games, compiz effects etc..)
udovdh: ok, thanks. I can test on fedora for rv630 and 635
udovdh: dual and single screen
bridgman: for 5xx 3d almost all of the work was done by other devs; Dave, Corbin, Nicolai, and some others I'm forgetting who will probably be POed with me and never touch our driver again ;(
bridgman: so far the work on 6xx/7xx 3d has been done by different people; Richard, Matthias and Alex
bridgman: I think Alex worked on 5xx 3d as well so there is some overlap ;)
ndim: Ah, I see.
udovdh: ndim, why devil when I ask about the games?
udovdh: by the time of HAR2009 stuff should be working OK?
udovdh: (august 2009)
ndim: udovdh: Well, it appeared bridgman had an uncanny timing showing up just when you had asked a question suitable for him to answer.
udovdh: haha ok, thats why
udovdh: thanks for the info bridgman
bridgman: that happens a lot; no idea how it works
bridgman: probably; sometimes the voices are useful ;)
Jin^eLD: guys, anyone on Fedora 10 with a Mobilitiy Radeon HD 3400 Series card? I'm using xorg-x11-drv-radeonhd-1.2.3-1.5.20081112git.fc10.x86_64 and I can observe that xorg uses about 20-30% cpu time constantly, although no fancy graphics are used, just normal gnome and firefox, no effects, nothing
Jin^eLD: is that known/currently normal/workaround available/etc?
loki_: i have an issue with fglrx-552 ( i know this should go in#ati but this channel is dead as the driver)
Jin^eLD: I'm changing some stuff
Jin^eLD: oops wrong window
loki_: my xserver starts at 800x600 yet randr reports max resolution of 1280x720
loki_: any idea?
ndim: Jin^eLD: I'd guess those 20..30% are due to Firefox/Flash.
ndim: Jin^eLD: "killall npviewer.bin" to kill all running flash apps for testing, and "killall firefox".
ndim: Jin^eLD: You could use "top" to find out which process is at fault.
ndim: However, if the "Xorg" process is eating CPU, that might just be due to some misbehaving app.
Jin^eLD: ndim: I could indeed see firefox in top, like X 20%, firefox 20%
Jin^eLD: but then firefox goes down when idle
Jin^eLD: but Xorg stays at 20% constantly
Jin^eLD: I'll try the npreviewer killing, but in top only firefox and Xorg showed significant usage
ndim: Jin^eLD: I have resorted to "killall -STOP firefox" when I don't use it and "killall -CONT firefox" when I resume using it. Someone has even written the proper hooks for some window manager to do that.
Jin^eLD: ndim: why is that not a problem with other graphics cards/drivers?
ndim: It is not?
Jin^eLD: ndim: on my old celeron notebook with i810 graphics - Xorg is at about 1% cpu
ndim: Same software versions?
ndim: Same firefox, same Xorg?
Jin^eLD: and firefox that is idling with 20 open tabs on another virtual desktop is with about 4.6%
ndim: Same Gnome, etc?
Jin^eLD: ok.. true, not the same.. older stuff
ndim: Not comparable, then.
ndim: I'd blame it on FF.
Jin^eLD: Fedora 10 on new one, Fedora 7 on the old one, although same firefox version
Jin^eLD: well, firefox is the same in that equasion..
yangman: same extensions?
Jin^eLD: ok lets put it another way: if I quite ff Xorg should go down in cpu usage? is that what you are saying?
yangman: try it
Jin^eLD: ok, secs, its on my gf's notebook
Jin^eLD: indeed, without firefox cpu usage is low on F10
Jin^eLD: hmm, why did it get that much worse with newer xorg then? I'm really surprised...
shepherd: Can any dev peoples help me with a ( I think ) bug ?