Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Linus Wants Nouveau Merged Into Kernel

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Linus Wants Nouveau Merged Into Kernel

    Phoronix: Linus Wants Nouveau Merged Into Kernel

    This morning the first DRM pull request went in for the Linux 2.6.33 kernel that brings many nice graphics changes for Intel, ATI/AMD, and VMware users. Anything for NVIDIA hardware through Novueau was not mentioned as there is no readied support, but as we stated in our article this morning, its unlikely to see Nouveau's DRM in the mainline kernel before the Linux 2.6.34 kernel...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=Nzc5MA

  • #2
    The idea is really good, it shouldn't be that bad when Fedora ships it by default. But then go further and do the same for aufs2 please - Ubuntu ships it too by default.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Kano View Post
      The idea is really good, it shouldn't be that bad when Fedora ships it by default. But then go further and do the same for aufs2 please - Ubuntu ships it too by default.
      aufs will probably never be merged, the vfs maintainers are looking for other solutions, like union mounts instead.

      Comment


      • #4
        Well the current solutions like Fedora/Moblin uses without aufs2 is not that good. It restricts the usable space too much - not just the size of the tmpfs used for aufs which could be increased easlyly with a remount,size=xG.

        Comment


        • #5
          The mailing list client at sourceforge really sucks. I didn't manage to view the entire thread :/
          Anyway, for Nouveau, it seems that their are issues with some microde that need to be solved too.

          Comment


          • #6
            "David Airlie nor any of the Nouveau developers have yet to comment on this thread, but we are awaiting their response(s). "

            Note that it's currently the middle of the night in Australia, where Red Hat's nouveau developer (Ben Skeggs) lives. (Also where Dave lives, for that matter).

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by AdamW View Post
              "David Airlie nor any of the Nouveau developers have yet to comment on this thread, but we are awaiting their response(s). "

              Note that it's currently the middle of the night in Australia, where Red Hat's nouveau developer (Ben Skeggs) lives. (Also where Dave lives, for that matter).
              Yep, I know their locations, I am just commenting though that they haven't said an official response yet.
              Michael Larabel
              http://www.michaellarabel.com/

              Comment


              • #8
                there are a few interesting responses:
                http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/f...ewmonth=200912

                (also unfortunatley unable to show the thread)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Kano View Post
                  Well the current solutions like Fedora/Moblin uses without aufs2 is not that good. It restricts the usable space too much - not just the size of the tmpfs used for aufs which could be increased easlyly with a remount,size=xG.
                  that may be the case, but that doesn't help get aufs merged when the vfs maintainers are against it so completely.
                  You should look into union mounts status.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I've heard all the excuses. If it isn't ready, they shouldn't ship it to millions of people.
                    Geeeeee whillickers, Mr Torvalds! What part of "perpetual beta-ness of Fedora" don't you understand?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by pipe13 View Post
                      Geeeeee whillickers, Mr Torvalds! What part of "perpetual beta-ness of Fedora" don't you understand?
                      Perpetual betaness doesn't mean unusable.
                      I think I read somewhere that Linus himself uses Fedora.

                      And for that matter, isn't Linux itself kinda perpetually beta?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
                        Perpetual betaness doesn't mean unusable.
                        I think I read somewhere that Linus himself uses Fedora.

                        And for that matter, isn't Linux itself kinda perpetually beta?
                        When you think of the graphics driver changes that that happened not so long ago and broke user (intel) desktops, it certainly looks like it.
                        I have a feeling Intel is given too much of a free hand in submitting early changes without keeping a backup. It caused several supposedly stable releases of kernels to behave as some shitty betas for many users.
                        Although hidden regressions are not avoidable in general, it is unthinkable they didn't know (or shouldn't have known) about this when they submitted the code.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
                          isn't Linux itself kinda perpetually beta?
                          Sure seems like it if they can't yet create a stable API for drivers to use.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Yfrwlf View Post
                            Sure seems like it if they can't yet create a stable API for drivers to use.
                            Thats on purpose and by design. Linux will likely never have a stable driver api. That would make it too easy to ship binary blobs. Put the drivers in kernel and they will be maintained for kernel version compatibility by the kernel developers.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Linus Torvalds has made his position on "stable kernel APIs" clear many years ago. His main point is that stable interfaces will hinder the kernel from progressing.
                              Originally posted by http://lwn.net/1999/0211/a/lt-binary.html
                              I refuse to be at the mercy of any binary-only module. And that's why I refuse to care about them - not because of any really technical reasons, not because I'm a callous bastard, but because I refuse to tie my hands behind my back and hear somebody say "Bend Over, Boy, Because You Have It Coming To You".

                              I allow binary-only modules, but I want people to know that they are _only_ ever expected to work on the one version of the kernel that they were compiled for. Anything else is just a very nice unexpected bonus if it happens to work.
                              The entire message is too long to post here verbatim, but it is surely worth reading.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X