[libre-riscv-dev] porting AMDVLK to the Libre RISC-V 3D GPU: NLNet EUR 50, 000 Grant application
pham.michael.98 at gmail.com
Tue Oct 1 22:00:38 BST 2019
Oh I remember what my third point is now.
Thirdly, even if we don't fund the RADV developers (which I don't see
in the original proposal anyway), that doesn't stop us from creating a
Libre RISC-V derivative of RADV. You guys (Jacob and Luke) can use the
funds for your own development (plus anyone who wants to help out with
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 3:37 PM Michael Pham <pham.michael.98 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 12:35 AM Jacob Lifshay <programmerjake at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'd be inclined to use RADV anyway because it has much more community
> > support, is in mesa, and is not just code thrown over the wall (which
> > is what AMDVLK is, since AMDVLK is basically AMD's proprietary shared
> > windows/linux graphics driver rewired to use LLVM instead of their
> > proprietary compiler.
> > Will discuss more on-list after Michael's response.
> > Jacob
> I've responded to the whole amd graphics driver dispute off list. So
> let's return to the subject of RADV with technical arguments. First of
> all, even though RADV was basically started by Dave, he's not that
> involved with the development anymore and many other Mesa developers
> are working on it instead. We shouldn't throw away the possibility of
> using RADV just because of the person who started it -- that would be,
> in my opinion, disrespectful of everyone else working on RADV by
> ignoring their contributions.
> Secondly, if we do forget about RADV, then we should forget about
> using AMDVLK as well for the obvious reason that AMDVLK is by AMD that
> Luc seems to be so antagonistic towards. And we can continue to forget
> about Intel and ARM drivers as well because, well, as you can see on
> Luc's blog is antagonistic towards them as well. My point is that we
> shouldn't let Luc's accusations (true or not) stop us from reusing any
> of these drivers because at that point we might as well just ignore
> every corporation's open-source contributions. For example, Microsoft
> has done some very unethical things in the past and also has
> contributed code to the Linux kernel. What are you going to do? Fork
> the Linux kernel and rip out Microsoft's code? The RISC-V Foundation
> has acted unethical as well by not being as open as they claim. What
> are we going to do? Throw away all our work because it's based on
> RISC-V? I think you get what I'm trying to say.
> Thirdly.... ahhh I forgot what else I was trying to say :( If I
> remember I'll send out another email.
> Note to everyone: Luc is not Luke. Different people, not a misspelling.
More information about the libre-riscv-dev