Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Linux 6.6 To Better Protect Against The Illicit Behavior Of NVIDIA's Proprietary Driver

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by Barley9432 View Post
    This is the sort of hostility that makes me want to avoid Linux. This also affects other open source projects like ZFS constantly. This hostility is unnecessary
    Hostility? They're causing their customers to violate the license under which the software is made available, arguably violating it themselves. How about they do like every other major GPU vendor (including themselves at times) and publish an ordinary Linux driver for their hardware.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Barley9432 View Post
      This is the sort of hostility that makes me want to avoid Linux. This also affects other open source projects like ZFS constantly. This hostility is unnecessary
      maybe if they would stop infringing on the licence, linux devs wouldnt need to be hostile to it

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Barley9432 View Post
        This is stopped in the courtroom not with this pettiness. If they are truly in violation of the GPL then they can be taken to court. If they aren't (which is clearly the case here), then this is just someone holding a grudge.
        You should check out Google vs Oracle or Microsoft over trident browser engine. A normal copyright court action over source code licenses can take decades. These protections the Linux kernel is adding makes it the copyright infringement come under DMCA. DMCA case takes less than 1 year to resolve. The DMCA process is simpler.but there is a problen..
        The problem
        1) Nvidia is doing is a technological protection measure​ circumvention​.
        2) The effect of losing DMCA case is no longer having the rights to allow the distribution of the item doing technological protection measure​ circumvention in any DCMA signed up country on this bit that include all the EU and USA.

        Please note not allowing the distribution of the DMCA breaching item this include like a Ubuntu install iso that has include Nvidia closed source drivers. Yes not only would Nvidia be forbin from distribution so would everyone else. This would create tones of free space on Linux distribution mirror sites as all the Nvidia driver contaminated items have to be deleted. Forget getting old Nvidia cards to work that Nvidia no longer supports by using old Nvidia closed source drivers unless you have personal copies of those drivers or a willing to go to questionable sites.

        Please note ignoring the flag in the Linux kernel that says this export is GPL only is a technological protection measure under DCMA the added protections are not required to perform a DCMA case against Nvidia. Yes the fact that the export is GPL only flag meets the DCMA requirement of the technological protection measure is why taking this to court is so dangerous for end users.

        There is another danger here. Semantic Patching with Coccinelle is used with the Linux kernel.

        Any ideas what this means for functions marked "EXPORT_GPL_ONLY"? No right. It means any function marked "EXPORT_GPL_ONLY" could totally change its arguments and could also cease to exist between Linux versions this even includes LTS(long term support) versions. So some random point in the future if Nvidia is left doing what they are doing the kernel is there is going to be some kernel corruption. This is not a guess Nvidia drivers have caused kernels issues over and over again using "EXPORT_GPL_ONLY" symbols.

        Yes this better protection against Nvidia miss using Linux kernel exports means Nvidia users know that 6.6 is going to cause them some issues. The issue will be that the driver does not work. Past issue caused by Nvidia driver miss using EXPORT_GPL_ONLY have include harddrive data corruption caused by using EXPORT_GPL_ONLY functions that had changed and this will happen again if Nvidia allowed to get away with doing this.

        Please note Nvidia miss behavior with internal only functions is not just restricted to Linux. Nvidia has been caught by Microsoft using Windows internal only functions as well and also caused users to have their hard-drive to have data corruption because of these actions the Microsoft requirement for driver inspection did come about because of this. Yes items of the Linux kernel flagged as EXPORT_GPL_ONLY need to be treated as internal only functions that only the Linux kernel and the drivers that ship with it can use.

        Like it or not making the software technological protections stronger in the Linux kernel 6.6 to prevent Nvidia miss use is the best end user outcome. Most people have not considered that breaking the "EXPORT_GPL_ONLY" falls under DCMA and DCMA laws come with nasty ripple effects. Also the miss behavior of NVIDIA is not just restricted Linux they did it with Apple before Nvidia decided no more Nvidia cards they did it with Microsoft and they do it with Linux. It over due for NVIDIA to grow up and stop doing this stuff.

        Basically NVIDIA need to stop being a brat stealing cookies from a cookie jar that labeled for staff when there is a free jar of cookies next to it that was kept over full with cookies for guests to eat yes the labeled jar has a bit better quality cookies but that no excuse for being a thief. There was a case like this with cookies where a person died because they ate the staff cookies because the staff cookies were highly caffeinated and the staff knew to eat only 1 per 8 hours and the person ate 4 in under 15 mins and overdosed. So what Nvidia doing is dangerous to-do in the real world as well.

        Yes the EXPORT_GPL_ONLY in the Linux kernel is never added just to make some non mainline drivers life hard there is always a technical or patent reason why. The technical reason is that the function API is absolutely open to change and anything using it not kept in alignment risks causing user data loss on grand scale.

        Comment


        • #34
          I'm sorry to have hurt some feelings but it's not because a company is worth big money at x point in time that it will continue forever. Ppl have a hard time projecting it seems.

          Nvidia keeps pushing vendor locked solutions like dlss, to me it's similar to pushing a closed video codec, while the whole industry is moving to open standards.

          It's not because your solution is supposedly superior at x time, and/or has more buzzwords and gimmicks, that it's good and can't be challenged.

          Similarly, Lightroom used to be absolutely unavoidable, yet all the pro photographers I follow have switched to other solutions in the past 5 years, tired of getting milked by Adobe.

          And I've never seen so many people buy amd gpus than this past 2 years, often disgrunted by team green's attitude.

          If MS really moves on to cloud based desktops soonish, the Nvidia supposed paradigm would fall on its face real quick.

          Comment


          • #35
            Several of the core Linux maintainers need to be kicked out. This kind of religious zealotry for the GPL license is killing progress in the LInux ecosystem. I fully support the ideals of the GPL license but I dont care one bit about it if the core hardware I use is crippled by some zealous idealist who thinks the world should revolve around those ideals.

            That is my rant... there are definitely other options out there that rival Linux. Windows with WSL2 is basically everything you could want in Linux plus compatibility with pretty much everything on the planet. Heck windows even has a COW file system now with ReFS. Their stability is typically on par with Linux and they don't have the suckness of the Linux core maintainers.

            Probably the only reasons not to go with windows these days is that it is easier to get every last drop of server performance from Linux... and of course there is the astronomically huge cost of windows server. There is no way to run a cloud service at scale with any economy on Windows. Outside of that, its really a tossup.

            I run Linux these days as my primary OS with windows running in a VM, but the moment the Linux kernel devs break my hardware support I will dump it because there is simply no way to get away from Nvidia.

            Truthfully though I think this is needless posturing... Linux cant escape Nvidia, no matter how they feel about them. To many mega corps rely on Nvidia and Linux, so this is just a needless injection of toxin into the community pool because I think the kernel devs have a yearly required quota.

            Comment


            • #36
              You're not the one in charge though. Everyone likes to complain but almost nobody knows what it's like to be a maintainer.

              The linux team is working as intended, you're free to opt in and out as you please.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by zexelon View Post
                Several of the core Linux maintainers need to be kicked out. This kind of religious zealotry for the GPL license is killing progress in the LInux ecosystem. I fully support the ideals of the GPL license but I dont care one bit about it if the core hardware I use is crippled by some zealous idealist who thinks the world should revolve around those ideals.
                Is it zealotry when the issue mainly impact Nvidia refusing to properly adhere to Linux kernel license while both AMD and Intel have no problem? It seems more and more organizations and companies feel alienated by Nvidia's conducts.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by finalzone View Post

                  Is it zealotry when the issue mainly impact Nvidia refusing to properly adhere to Linux kernel license while both AMD and Intel have no problem? It seems more and more organizations and companies feel alienated by Nvidia's conducts.
                  Yes, it is zealotry. Sure Nvidia is no tech Mother Teresa, but they have eclipsed their entire sector in innovation and utterly dominated the HPC market. I respect them for that and rather than trying to kick at reality with these petty gripes that wont make any difference, why not engage with them in a friendly way?

                  Honestly, with the amount of money Nvidia is making if they had the desire to do so, they could simply fork the Linux kernel. Honestly I think they should and make a seperate loosely compatible but Nvidia stable kernel. It would solve so many of these issues and make the end users life so much easier.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by zexelon View Post

                    Yes, it is zealotry. Sure Nvidia is no tech Mother Teresa, but they have eclipsed their entire sector in innovation and utterly dominated the HPC market. I respect them for that and rather than trying to kick at reality with these petty gripes that wont make any difference, why not engage with them in a friendly way?

                    Honestly, with the amount of money Nvidia is making if they had the desire to do so, they could simply fork the Linux kernel. Honestly I think they should and make a seperate loosely compatible but Nvidia stable kernel. It would solve so many of these issues and make the end users life so much easier.
                    Damn right it is zealotry. And I will definitely support Nvidia forking the kernel as the ultimate middle finger to those asshole devs.

                    Alternatively, they could simply continue tracking upstream and maintain a patchset for each kernel release that rips out or undo all these nonsensical traps. This bullshit is seldom updated, so there the maintenance burden for said patchset should be considerably low. Those of us who want to use the Nvidia drivers can simply grab the latest release from kernel.org, apply the patchset, compile it and we are good to go.
                    Last edited by Sonadow; 29 August 2023, 11:00 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by zexelon View Post
                      Honestly, with the amount of money Nvidia is making if they had the desire to do so, they could simply fork the Linux kernel. Honestly I think they should and make a seperate loosely compatible but Nvidia stable kernel. It would solve so many of these issues and make the end users life so much easier.
                      Nvidia already tried that once. Nvidia found themselves on the wrong side of a 4 billion dollars per month patent license bill. Something to be aware of lot parties license their patents to be used by the Linux kernel as long as it full GPLv2. It also what Microsoft found out with WSL1 as they started implementing different Linux kernel features different parties who add those features to the Linux kernel turns up and were like hey Microsoft you want to implement that were is our patent payment please.

                      The reality of the Linux kernel is its not just zealotry. Linux kernel has managed to get a stack companies that normally hate each to agree to work on a unified protect even more share their patents with that project. Key point is the GPLv2 terms are linked to what has made this possible.

                      Something else some of the patent licenses for the patents in the Linux for a closed source product in fact forbin you dealing with particular companies. So for a closed source product you cannot license all the patents that the Linux kernel uses as a complete set because the closed source licensing is incompatible with each other.

                      Originally posted by zexelon View Post
                      Several of the core Linux maintainers need to be kicked out.
                      The reality is you are presuming Zealotry. The problem is not Zealotry. The problem is commercial. Nvidia by using "EXPORT_GPL_ONLY" the way they are in a lot of cases is using patented technology with the license to use it. Then wake up the patent holders are paying the Linux kernel developers wages.

                      You did not notice that Samsung Electronics is behind the 6.6 patch.
                      Samsung and Nvidia resolve a patent dispute shortly before a ruling that could have blocked deliveries of Nvidia's products to the US.

                      Yes there is some really bad blood here between Nvidia and Samsung still after the 2016 settlement. Yes this is Nvidia wants their patents paid for ever Samsung device used but then wants to use Samsung patents provided to the Linux kernel only to be used under GPLv2 license with their closed source kernel module... Can you now see the steam rising out Samsung legal department over this.

                      Christoph Hellwig common works on this stuff as a independent consultant. The party paying you notice by who is reviewing the patches who does not have to.

                      Nvidia has gone around enforcing their patents. Nvidia has made lots of bad blood due to doing this. Lot of the patent holders of the patents the Linux kernel use have bad blood with Nvidia. Yes Nvidia by lots of these stunts with the Linux kernel driver is circumventing the patent agreements they have so not paying for the patent usage of their closed source commercial driver but getting payment from the other party.

                      Yes Nvidia if you wish to use particular things of the Linux kernel you have to release your driver GPLv2 so that the companies that you NVIDA are receiving patent licensing payments from don't get upset and don't end up working out how to break your work around.

                      zexelon this is not simple Zealotry.problem you could dismiss all the current Linux kernel developers replace them with a complete set of new developers and inside 6 months the problem would be back. The problem comes from the company legal departments and the patent agreements in place.

                      The reality here Nvidia need to make up their mind either do AMD and fully open source the kernel side or do not use anything marked EXPORT_GPL_ONLY either choice means Nvidia will not be upsetting legal departments of companies they have legally force patent payments out of. Remember those legal departments say to the employed developers fix this or we will use DMCA laws that will fairly much nuke everything. Yes the developers doing this stuff are very much in a rock and hard place.

                      Please note other times it been IBM and so on its not just one company highly upset with Nvidia. Remember Nvidia enforces their patent licenses on companies that license their patents exactly to the letter. So Nvidia is Zealotry in enforcement of the patent licenses where a person has to pay them then at the Linux kernel the same thing happens.

                      This is "What Goes Around Comes Around". You cannot expect to do absolute enforcement of patent/software licenses on others then not have the same happen to you.

                      Yes AMD deciding to open source the ATI drivers when they took over was because they saw the writing on the wall. AMD does want to be paid for their patents on devices made and they saw that would be working with the same parties in the Linux kernel so this means AMD legal department worked out really quickly to keep everyone happy/ish they would have to obey GPLv2 to the letter for the Linux kernel driver like it or not so that they could enforce their device patents licenses to the letter without having large of a bad blood problem.

                      Large bad blood problem result is developers being told to their employers to go out of way to make X companies life hard.

                      This is not simple Zealotry you missed that this is two to tango. Nvidia is just as much of a Zealot and that the problem.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X