3 ms·

Right, but that clarification was pre-edit? I'm aware of people's sensitivity to putting demands on efforts like this, which is why I tried to frame it as the

Right, but that clarification was pre-edit? I'm aware of people's sensitivity to putting demands on efforts like this, which is why I tried to frame it as the genuine curiosity it is. This sort of low-level work is out of my depth. Is there painstaking probing to find different addresses/states between a Max and an Ultra? The M2 Ultra has two GPU variants (60-core and 72-core), although the Pro and Max also have GPU count variants. Are those transparent from this OpenGL driver's point of view? Or is there timing/dispatch work involved? Hence the question! I would have made an explicit criticism if I had one. I implied nothing, but I realize that has no bearing on what the reader can or will infer...

freedomben 3y ago
Yes I would have put it in the original (pre-edit), but better late than never :-) Yeah I've never done GPU driver hacking so I can't answer your question with optimal specificity, but there's always something new. It's usually (but not always) backwards compatible, but Apple is a special case since they are their only supported customer. That means that they can iterate very fast with flagrant disregard for backwards compatiblity (I don't necessarily mean that in a negative way, it can be great for development/progress), and it means that any changes they make have to be reverse engineered by setting debug breakpoints, examining state, signals, etc to try and figure out what they changed and how it works now. It's a truly monumental undertaking.
- Dylan16807 3y ago
  > Yes I would have put it in the original (pre-edit), but better late than never :-) Huh? The clarification is in the original (pre-edit). It's the second sentence. "Right, but that clarification was pre-edit?" wasn't a hypothetical, it was making a claim.
  - freedomben 3y ago
    Good point. Either other people missed it like I did, or I'm wrong about why the downvotes are happening. (or for completeness I suppose a third possibility that it was edited in later, but I'm not alleging that in any way).
- mschuster91 3y ago
  > That means that they can iterate very fast with flagrant disregard for backwards compatiblity In practice though, Apple is famous for not replacing everything left and right. IIRC, the UART part of their SoCs dates back to the first generation of iPhones, if not even earlier.

freedomben 3y ago

Yes I would have put it in the original (pre-edit), but better late than never :-) Yeah I've never done GPU driver hacking so I can't answer your question with optimal specificity, but there's always something new. It's usually (but not always) backwards compatible, but Apple is a special case since they are their only supported customer. That means that they can iterate very fast with flagrant disregard for backwards compatiblity (I don't necessarily mean that in a negative way, it can be great for development/progress), and it means that any changes they make have to be reverse engineered by setting debug breakpoints, examining state, signals, etc to try and figure out what they changed and how it works now. It's a truly monumental undertaking.

Dylan16807 3y ago
> Yes I would have put it in the original (pre-edit), but better late than never :-) Huh? The clarification is in the original (pre-edit). It's the second sentence. "Right, but that clarification was pre-edit?" wasn't a hypothetical, it was making a claim.
- freedomben 3y ago
  Good point. Either other people missed it like I did, or I'm wrong about why the downvotes are happening. (or for completeness I suppose a third possibility that it was edited in later, but I'm not alleging that in any way).
mschuster91 3y ago
> That means that they can iterate very fast with flagrant disregard for backwards compatiblity In practice though, Apple is famous for not replacing everything left and right. IIRC, the UART part of their SoCs dates back to the first generation of iPhones, if not even earlier.