You are right about the AUR. This is just a step into opensource community
direction.
According to my previous answer about ClearLinux (and others), which is more
important here. We are still coordinating this, but I think we are on the right
path. And NEO can be considered as opensource client
: Lis, Tomasz ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Dave
Airlie
Cc: Dunajski, Bartosz ; ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk;
Winiarski, Michal
Subject: Re: [RFC v1] Data port coherency control for UMDs.
+ Dave, as FYI
Quoting Tomasz Lis (2018-03-19 14:37:34)
> The OpenCL driver develpers requeste
...@linux.intel.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 11:03 AM
To: Dunajski, Bartosz ; Lis, Tomasz
; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Dave Airlie
; Ewins, Jon
Cc: ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk; Winiarski, Michal
Subject: RE: [RFC v1] Data port coherency control for UMDs.
+ Jon, as we clearly have a
I think the adoption is not a problem here.
If driver can query that patch is active on the specific setup, new
capabilities will be always reported to the user.
-Original Message-
Quoting Dunajski, Bartosz (2018-03-26 12:46:13)
> Here is pull request with patch usage:
>
[mailto:joonas.lahti...@linux.intel.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 11:19 AM
To: Dunajski, Bartosz ; Ewins, Jon
; Lis, Tomasz ;
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Dave Airlie
Cc: ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk; Winiarski, Michal
Subject: RE: [RFC v1] Data port coherency control for UMDs.
Quoting Dunajski, Bartosz
I would like to add few things that were mentioned previously.
According to adoption plan.
Our plan is to drop dependency on LLVM 4.0.1 (with custom patches) and instead
compile with unpatched (either system or vanilla) LLVM 6.0. Work to transition
our compiler stack to LLVM 6 is expected to com
Additionally, we are already on Arch:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/compute-runtime
Can I assume that adoption plan is not a blocker anymore?
Bartosz
> Yes, once you follow through with the plan, there should be no issues about
> merging patches to support the driver.
>
> You may want to
