I note that both the 2 factions have at least a main point in common in the confrontation. Implicit sync is for legacy.
Now, as it has been stated, Wayland has been developed with implicit sync criteria. Why? My personal opinion is that, independently of Nvidia, linux should move on explicit sync. Developers should switch the whole software, also if Nvidia didn't exist. And if it is true that Wayland has been written by implicit sync criteria I don't imagine how this big mistake could have been made. Surely, Linux developers cannot adapt the whole system to match Nvidia drivers though it would be the best solution just as Nvidia cannot adapt its driver to Linux condition. Cooperation apart, the only solution is that Nvidia makes an own Linux development team like Intel.
Surely, AMD and Intel development is linux conformant but has a defect it doesn't solicit linux to get better. My personal opinion is that the real difference is in the nature of the development: Nvidia realizes items aimed at the market, Linux developers realize an Oses for the enthusiasts. Linux developers are not interested in the change in the same way as Nvidia, if not solicited for new hardware and its features. If Wayland could have been developed in explicit sync criteria instead of implicit sync, the actual mistake is severe such as Nvidia has stuck over Eglstream for years. The mistake is severe because wayland is an occasion of modernization.
The best solution, if realizable, would be wayland+vulkan based on explicit sync eliminating opengl. The legacy stuff for legacy operating systems. I think that some courageous linux developers should write a new operating system.
Now, as it has been stated, Wayland has been developed with implicit sync criteria. Why? My personal opinion is that, independently of Nvidia, linux should move on explicit sync. Developers should switch the whole software, also if Nvidia didn't exist. And if it is true that Wayland has been written by implicit sync criteria I don't imagine how this big mistake could have been made. Surely, Linux developers cannot adapt the whole system to match Nvidia drivers though it would be the best solution just as Nvidia cannot adapt its driver to Linux condition. Cooperation apart, the only solution is that Nvidia makes an own Linux development team like Intel.
Surely, AMD and Intel development is linux conformant but has a defect it doesn't solicit linux to get better. My personal opinion is that the real difference is in the nature of the development: Nvidia realizes items aimed at the market, Linux developers realize an Oses for the enthusiasts. Linux developers are not interested in the change in the same way as Nvidia, if not solicited for new hardware and its features. If Wayland could have been developed in explicit sync criteria instead of implicit sync, the actual mistake is severe such as Nvidia has stuck over Eglstream for years. The mistake is severe because wayland is an occasion of modernization.
The best solution, if realizable, would be wayland+vulkan based on explicit sync eliminating opengl. The legacy stuff for legacy operating systems. I think that some courageous linux developers should write a new operating system.
Comment