[libre-riscv-dev] [Bug 365] ROCM/Libre-SOC GPU Opcode interoperability

[bugzilla-daemon@libre-soc.org]

https://bugs.libre-soc.org/show_bug.cgi?id=365

--- Comment #12 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl@lkcl.net> ---
(In reply to Yehowshua from comment #11)
> (In reply to Jacob Lifshay from comment #7)
> > From what I understand, ROCm is only for OpenCL/CUDA-style compute, it
> > doesn't implement the Vulkan or OpenGL APIs:
> > https://github.com/RadeonOpenCompute/ROCm/issues/706
> > https://github.com/RadeonOpenCompute/ROCm/issues/131
> 
> Hi Jacob, you are correct - however - Mesa has a Vulkan implementation that
> can sit on top of ROCM.

from 706:

"ROCm is AMD's compute stack. If you want Vulkan support, you have two options.
1) the Mesa community RADV driver or 2) AMD's AMDVLK driver (which should be
also part of their AMDGPU-PRO driver)."

my interpretation of that is that he hasn't explicitly said "no" (which is
where the confusion comes about), he's said, "if you want vulkan, you need RADV
or AMDVLK" from which we *deduce* that there is no connection between the two.

now, given that AMDGPU llvm support is now upstream, it *might* be the case
that two out of three of these projects *happen* to use the exact same
AMDGPU llvm compiler support.

my understanding of AMDVLK - jacob will be able to clarify - is that it's
a radically different approach, basically a sort-of effort to port and
libre-license what was formerly a proprietary Win32 driver to linux, where
the team working on it were isolated from what went into the upstream
AMDGPU llvm.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
libre-riscv-dev mailing list
libre-riscv-dev@lists.libre-riscv.org
http://lists.libre-riscv.org/mailman/listinfo/libre-riscv-dev