6 ms·

Not yet - there is no display support for that GPU in current Linux kernel, nor in 4.14 that is going to be released in 1-2 weeks. Users will have to wait for

by c2h5oh 9y ago

Not yet - there is no display support for that GPU in current Linux kernel, nor in 4.14 that is going to be released in 1-2 weeks. Users will have to wait for 4.15 - until mid-late January.

shmerl 9y ago
You can use staging kernel from AMD meanwhile. Upstreamed one will be more polished, but it's basically the same thing.
lightedman 9y ago
You need a new kernel to support a GPU? What ass-backwards garbage is this? With Windows, it's install a new driver; not update the core of the OS and possibly introduce horrible bugs.
- shmerl 9y ago
  Read this: https://www.reddit.com/r/linux_gaming/comments/73xutn/why_cant_amdgpu_be_built_as_an_external_kernel/dnvpwj2/ https://www.reddit.com/r/linux_gaming/comments/73xutn/why_ca...
  - lightedman 9y ago
    Yep, utterly backwards. That kind of thing should be purely in driver space where it belongs, hooked on a driver model and not a kernel upstream model. It's funny that Microsoft learned this problem and fixed it back in 2007-ish. Well, in another 30 years Linux will catch up. Maybe.
    - shmerl 9y ago
      MS didn't fix it. They simply froze their abstraction and everyone expects it to be the same. Linux supports kernel modularity for a long time already. The only difference - they don't guarantee interfaces to be set in stone. So clearly they aren't interested in "catching up", since they do it on purpose. I don't necessary agree that it works for their goals (preventing messed up un-upstreamable kernel modules), but they do it for a reason.
      - lightedman 9y ago
        "MS didn't fix it." Linux can't lose the GPU without taking the entire system or the program it's operating down. Windows can have the entire subsystem crash and come right back up almost instantly without loss of screen data, including active game windows. Microsoft most certainly fixed their graphics problems that were rampant from NT4 through Vista.
    - dingo_bat 9y ago
      Meanwhile windows is able to restart the entire graphics subsystem with a new driver without losing apps. I doubt linux will ever reach these levels.
      - shmerl 9y ago
        Yeah, right. Windows can do this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eP31lluUDWU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eP31lluUDWU
- Hello71 9y ago
  hint: it has something to do with the fact that Windows machines have a reputation for BSoDing regularly, whereas Linux systems have no such reputation.
  - lightedman 9y ago
    "whereas Linux systems have no such reputation." Hah. I've been through kernel panic hell more times than years in my age, and I'm OLD. You must be real new to the Linux world if you think it has a spotless record. In fact, it's still possible to hardlock the kernel all these years after I reported how. Lemme show you how poorly the Kernel handles an encrypted RAMDisk with a couple configured parameters.
    - bkor 9y ago
      > Hah. I've been through kernel panic hell more times than years in my age, and I'm OLD. So why do you pretend NOT to know at all that the kernel handles/provides drivers? If you're so experienced you should be well aware of that.
      - comex 9y ago
        Well, Windows notably switched to a new graphics driver model in Vista that puts parts of graphics drivers in userland, in order to allow them to crash without taking down the system. But I think that's comparable to what Linux has always been doing with Mesa vs. DRM; not sure what the details look like though.
      - lightedman 9y ago
        "So why do you pretend NOT to know at all that the kernel handles/provides drivers?" You're failing at reading and understanding any of my words, which means you're likely looking to start a problem. Okay, I'll play along. I know that the Kernel handles and provides drivers - what you're failing to understand is that I think it's HORRIBLE (and I can prove it hundreds of different ways on any Linux distro excepting maybe SELinux and its flavors.) Wake me up when the entire Linux graphics subsystem can crash without taking the entire computer, or one single app, along with it. Windows can do this. Linux can not. Linux is therefore doing things poorly. Even BSD handles this better. Every other OS excepting Linux has bothered to come into the modern age of graphics subsystems around 2007/2008. Linux is still behind and will remain so for the foreseeable future.
- csdreamer7 9y ago
  In addition to the other comments. Ubuntu's LTS, if you install hardware enablement stack, will automatically install new kernels once Ubuntu releases them for the LTS. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/LTSEnablementStack https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/LTSEnablementStack The desktop version does this automatically... if you install the LTS from a XX.XX.02 release: Ubuntu 16.04.2 does this. Ubuntu 16.04.1 does not-you have to manually enable it.
- naasking 9y ago
  > With Windows, it's install a new driver; not update the core of the OS and possibly introduce horrible bugs. Windows drivers are typically the source of Windows' horrible bugs. It's no different.
  - lightedman 9y ago
    Drivers tend to get fixed far faster than Kernels do. I'm speaking from personal experience in my reporting multiple issues with the Linux Kernel. In fact, as I look, the eight I reported years ago are still there, which means the inherent memory vulnerability is still there and Linus (improperly) chose to use ASLR to try to mitigate it instead of fixing it properly in the first place. And you want to make Microsoft look the worse party. That's hilarious.
    - beagle3 9y ago
      > Drivers tend to get fixed far faster than Kernels do. In windows world; but in my experience that's 6-12 months for driver, to 12-24 for kernel. In linux world, kernels (and drivers) get fixed much much faster, in the order of a couple of months.

by c2h5oh 9y ago

Not yet - there is no display support for that GPU in current Linux kernel, nor in 4.14 that is going to be released in 1-2 weeks. Users will have to wait for 4.15 - until mid-late January.

shmerl 9y ago

You can use staging kernel from AMD meanwhile. Upstreamed one will be more polished, but it's basically the same thing.

lightedman 9y ago

You need a new kernel to support a GPU? What ass-backwards garbage is this? With Windows, it's install a new driver; not update the core of the OS and possibly introduce horrible bugs.

shmerl 9y ago
Read this: https://www.reddit.com/r/linux_gaming/comments/73xutn/why_cant_amdgpu_be_built_as_an_external_kernel/dnvpwj2/ https://www.reddit.com/r/linux_gaming/comments/73xutn/why_ca...
- lightedman 9y ago
  Yep, utterly backwards. That kind of thing should be purely in driver space where it belongs, hooked on a driver model and not a kernel upstream model. It's funny that Microsoft learned this problem and fixed it back in 2007-ish. Well, in another 30 years Linux will catch up. Maybe.
  - shmerl 9y ago
    MS didn't fix it. They simply froze their abstraction and everyone expects it to be the same. Linux supports kernel modularity for a long time already. The only difference - they don't guarantee interfaces to be set in stone. So clearly they aren't interested in "catching up", since they do it on purpose. I don't necessary agree that it works for their goals (preventing messed up un-upstreamable kernel modules), but they do it for a reason.
    - lightedman 9y ago
      "MS didn't fix it." Linux can't lose the GPU without taking the entire system or the program it's operating down. Windows can have the entire subsystem crash and come right back up almost instantly without loss of screen data, including active game windows. Microsoft most certainly fixed their graphics problems that were rampant from NT4 through Vista.
  - dingo_bat 9y ago
    Meanwhile windows is able to restart the entire graphics subsystem with a new driver without losing apps. I doubt linux will ever reach these levels.
    - shmerl 9y ago
      Yeah, right. Windows can do this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eP31lluUDWU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eP31lluUDWU
Hello71 9y ago
hint: it has something to do with the fact that Windows machines have a reputation for BSoDing regularly, whereas Linux systems have no such reputation.
- lightedman 9y ago
  "whereas Linux systems have no such reputation." Hah. I've been through kernel panic hell more times than years in my age, and I'm OLD. You must be real new to the Linux world if you think it has a spotless record. In fact, it's still possible to hardlock the kernel all these years after I reported how. Lemme show you how poorly the Kernel handles an encrypted RAMDisk with a couple configured parameters.
  - bkor 9y ago
    > Hah. I've been through kernel panic hell more times than years in my age, and I'm OLD. So why do you pretend NOT to know at all that the kernel handles/provides drivers? If you're so experienced you should be well aware of that.
    - comex 9y ago
      Well, Windows notably switched to a new graphics driver model in Vista that puts parts of graphics drivers in userland, in order to allow them to crash without taking down the system. But I think that's comparable to what Linux has always been doing with Mesa vs. DRM; not sure what the details look like though.
    - lightedman 9y ago
      "So why do you pretend NOT to know at all that the kernel handles/provides drivers?" You're failing at reading and understanding any of my words, which means you're likely looking to start a problem. Okay, I'll play along. I know that the Kernel handles and provides drivers - what you're failing to understand is that I think it's HORRIBLE (and I can prove it hundreds of different ways on any Linux distro excepting maybe SELinux and its flavors.) Wake me up when the entire Linux graphics subsystem can crash without taking the entire computer, or one single app, along with it. Windows can do this. Linux can not. Linux is therefore doing things poorly. Even BSD handles this better. Every other OS excepting Linux has bothered to come into the modern age of graphics subsystems around 2007/2008. Linux is still behind and will remain so for the foreseeable future.
csdreamer7 9y ago
In addition to the other comments. Ubuntu's LTS, if you install hardware enablement stack, will automatically install new kernels once Ubuntu releases them for the LTS. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/LTSEnablementStack https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/LTSEnablementStack The desktop version does this automatically... if you install the LTS from a XX.XX.02 release: Ubuntu 16.04.2 does this. Ubuntu 16.04.1 does not-you have to manually enable it.
naasking 9y ago
> With Windows, it's install a new driver; not update the core of the OS and possibly introduce horrible bugs. Windows drivers are typically the source of Windows' horrible bugs. It's no different.
- lightedman 9y ago
  Drivers tend to get fixed far faster than Kernels do. I'm speaking from personal experience in my reporting multiple issues with the Linux Kernel. In fact, as I look, the eight I reported years ago are still there, which means the inherent memory vulnerability is still there and Linus (improperly) chose to use ASLR to try to mitigate it instead of fixing it properly in the first place. And you want to make Microsoft look the worse party. That's hilarious.
  - beagle3 9y ago
    > Drivers tend to get fixed far faster than Kernels do. In windows world; but in my experience that's 6-12 months for driver, to 12-24 for kernel. In linux world, kernels (and drivers) get fixed much much faster, in the order of a couple of months.