feedback to NVidia [was: Nvidia Drivers]r

[T. 'Nifty New Hat' Mitchell]

On Mon, Jun 07, 2004 at 03:09:15PM -0400, Sean Estabrooks wrote:
> "T. 'Nifty New Hat' Mitchell" <mitch48 at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> 
> > Consider the mmx class of instructions that Intel introduced.
> > What "C" code causes these instructions to be generated by gcc.
> > 
> > See ..../arch/i386/lib/mmx.c
....

> > One of the problems with complex instruction set processors (GFX
> > engines are complex) is that compiler writers often ignore the full
> > instruction set....
...
> > 
> > These are not frame buffers with 'common' processors glued to them.
> > 
> 
> What are you talking about?   Do you know how many open
> source 3D drivers there are?   Please check out:
> 
> http://dri.sourceforge.net/

Good pointer.

Looking at the design documents I see mention of what I am saying.
These are not simple frame buffers with common processors
glued to them.   The design of dri shows awareness of this task
and associated issues.

What I am failing to communicate is that there is a fun set of issues
associated with the use of asymmetric special purpose co-processor
subsystems for acceleration of any type.

Of interest dri does work on FC2 (nv driver) with my nVidia
Corporation NV11 [GeForce2 MX/MX 400] card, glxgears and more.  Just
not as fast as the accelerated driver.




-- 
	T o m  M i t c h e l l 
	/dev/null the ultimate in secure storage.