From 45fb61678d2c62894f2271ef73f2416b26256bc6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: lkcl Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2019 19:03:30 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] --- nlnet_2019_amdvlk_port/questions.mdwn | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) diff --git a/nlnet_2019_amdvlk_port/questions.mdwn b/nlnet_2019_amdvlk_port/questions.mdwn index 8e0e26200..64dc148ba 100644 --- a/nlnet_2019_amdvlk_port/questions.mdwn +++ b/nlnet_2019_amdvlk_port/questions.mdwn @@ -17,3 +17,12 @@ to the effort? How do you see future synchronisation with the evolving AMD code, assuming this is still actively developed? + +# Answer + +* the development strategy is iterative (described previously and used right across the board: simulation first, with improvements). the improvements - the addition of extra instructions and extra iterative cycles - continue as long as funding is available, always with the "previous version" being stable and useable. +* no, it will not be an "isolated effort". TODO: jacob's help +* no, we are not critically dependent on Mesa or AMD. +* note that we haven't decided yet whether to go with AMDVLK or RADV. RADV unfortunately was developed by David Airlie, who caused massive problems for Luc Verhagen. +* upstreaming will come "over time" as part of wider adoption. +* TODO: describe that AMDVLK is a port of the windows driver -- 2.30.2