Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 259

Thread: Linux Developers Still Reject NVIDIA Using DMA-BUF

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,133

    Default Linux Developers Still Reject NVIDIA Using DMA-BUF

    Phoronix: Linux Developers Still Reject NVIDIA Using DMA-BUF

    Going back to the beginning of this year there's been talk of NVIDIA looking at Optimus support for Linux and in August they confirmed they were working on NVIDIA Optimus Linux support. As part of their Optimus Linux implementation they want to use DMA-BUF for the multi-GPU interactions just like the open-source drivers, so that they can all work together. However, kernel developers continue to reject this notion...

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

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    701

    Default

    Well, what have you expected?

    You just DO NOT modyfy somebody else code to just change the license. You just do not.

    You ASK for such change.

  3. #3

    Default

    So why are Nvidia so afraid of opening up their drivers? I mean plenty of worldclass stuff in linux, my own plugins included. They are a hardware seller right? So the drivers that come with are open-source, what harm would it do? And sharing that, does that make anyone more competitive? Think about optimizations from the users aswell. Probably to the point of optimal. And generalized for any driver. So everyone contributes. How can that be negative?

    Peace Be With You.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    185

    Default

    Well, I won't blame the kernel devs for preventing Linux to become stuffed up with more proprietary software.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    207

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paradox Uncreated View Post
    So why are Nvidia so afraid of opening up their drivers? I mean plenty of worldclass stuff in linux, my own plugins included. They are a hardware seller right? So the drivers that come with are open-source, what harm would it do? And sharing that, does that make anyone more competitive? Think about optimizations from the users aswell. Probably to the point of optimal. And generalized for any driver. So everyone contributes. How can that be negative?

    Peace Be With You.
    Two words

    "patent trolls"

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paradox Uncreated View Post
    So why are Nvidia so afraid of opening up their drivers? I mean plenty of worldclass stuff in linux, my own plugins included. They are a hardware seller right? So the drivers that come with are open-source, what harm would it do? And sharing that, does that make anyone more competitive? Think about optimizations from the users aswell. Probably to the point of optimal. And generalized for any driver. So everyone contributes. How can that be negative?

    Peace Be With You.
    Except for a few points:

    1) First off, in most companies, S/w Coding standards is company proprietary information. So thats why NVIDIA can't just open their drivers.

    2) The drivers for the H/W are going to be at a VERY low level, and will basically show how NVIDIA accomplished everything in its H/W. You think AMD/Intel would like to see that information? This is especially notable, since NVIDIA has a lot of specialized components on its cards to handle certain tasks (they've hinted at such over the years...)

    3) If the Kernel does not expose a way for a technology like Optimus to work, then the only way to accomplish it is though drivers. And since NVIDIA will not open their drivers up (nor should they be required to), anyone who opposes NVIDIA's efforts looses the right to complain about the lack of optimus support.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    405

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gamerk2 View Post
    Except for a few points:

    1) First off, in most companies, S/w Coding standards is company proprietary information. So thats why NVIDIA can't just open their drivers.

    2) The drivers for the H/W are going to be at a VERY low level, and will basically show how NVIDIA accomplished everything in its H/W. You think AMD/Intel would like to see that information? This is especially notable, since NVIDIA has a lot of specialized components on its cards to handle certain tasks (they've hinted at such over the years...)

    3) If the Kernel does not expose a way for a technology like Optimus to work, then the only way to accomplish it is though drivers. And since NVIDIA will not open their drivers up (nor should they be required to), anyone who opposes NVIDIA's efforts looses the right to complain about the lack of optimus support.
    I think the two biggest reasons Nvidia and AMD don't want to open source their drivers or release certain specs (AMD) or anything at all (Nvidia) comes down to not wanting to reveal implementation details of Windows that are under NDA or risk leaking information that would be useful in breaking something like blu ray DRM.

    The nature of the way Nvidia and AMD's proprietary drivers and Linux itself works makes some things their drivers do possible to reverse engineer simply by watching the state of the hardware as you ask the proprietary driver to tell the GPU to do something. That's how Nouveau came about.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    115

    Default

    NVidia (and companie alike) will try, and you can't blame them for that,
    it's just business as usual. GPL is the sole reason for today user freedom
    and diverse software ecosystem. I think nVidia has to rethink their current
    position (Linus loves them) and give back to the community. And thats just
    exactly what developers are saying between lines. Don't be a douche, you
    can't get love (gazillions of manyears of GPL development) if you don't even
    consider supporting opensource drivers. It's not our fault that your engineers
    and financial analysts took the road of developing a technology that can't be
    nice with opensource. It's your choice, your financial bottom line and now
    grow a pair and deal with it.

    Damn, I'm pissed

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    945

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gamerk2 View Post
    3) If the Kernel does not expose a way for a technology like Optimus to work, then the only way to accomplish it is though drivers. And since NVIDIA will not open their drivers up (nor should they be required to), anyone who opposes NVIDIA's efforts looses the right to complain about the lack of optimus support.
    So how did they do it in Windows? Does the Windows kernel offer the technology required for implementing it or is it all in the drivers?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by devius View Post
    So how did they do it in Windows? Does the Windows kernel offer the technology required for implementing it or is it all in the drivers?
    It is mentioned in nVidia's Optimus Whitepaper PDF that the Optimus drivers in Windows relies on a capability in Windows 7 or later to be able to natively detect and utilize multiple cards of different types that share their buffer. This is also why it's impossible to get Optimus machines utilizing both cards on Vista and XP.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •