NVIDIA Pushes 62MB Of GSP Binary Firmware Blobs Into Linux-Firmware.Git

[caligula]

Can someone tell me where is the problem with the size?
The article mentions that it is lower than the AMD counterpart so i cant wrap my head around some of the fanboy/hater comments.
Also why would it need to be included in initramfs?
Isn't the filesystem already accessible at a time GPU drivers are loaded?
It should be as i was running without initramfs until deciding to use raid for EFI and boot partitions.

Most distros use initramfs because it's easier. No need to worry about drivers and special setups (MD, DM, RAID, encryption, KMS). It also supports compression (so the blob containing all drivers is just 150-200 MB, while custom kernel would be like 10 MB). The early KMS expects the firmware in the bzImage or initramfs. So without firmware you might not be able to see the boot logs.

[agd5f]

looks like amd did it way better with atombios approach. but nvidia had to reinvent the wheel and failed.

This is nothing like atombios. atombios is just the format of the data stored on the PCI option ROM. Option ROMs are used to store board specific information with the board itself. nvidia (and intel) have their own equivalents to atombios in the option ROMs on their boards that provide similar functionality. They provide a way for the driver to query board specific configuration details. Once the driver is up and running, it's largely irrelevant. The nvidia GSP firmware handles the latter case. E.g., manages the card state at runtime.

[timofonic]

Right, because besides these 3 countries hackers elsewhere don't steal data/sell/spy. Because when western countries do it it's called a "world based on rules".

No, but hackers relocate there a lot and they often hide in those places. It's geopolitics, there's everywhere but more concentrating in those places.

[qarium]

Insanity is the monolithic nature of the Linux kernel which has been discussed to death here.
Insanity if your distro installs all the firmware files simultaneously.
Otherwise it's manageable.

for me microsoft windows is insanity. if you want security then linux is the only way to go.

in windows you have stolen driver signing keys and trojan/virus who sign their own drivers.

[qarium]

If you're already using these super companies GPUs, why are you spamming this thread? Your input is completely wasteful.
Again, you cited me saying NVIDIA haters gonna hate and proceed to do just that. The irony is completely lost on you. What a shame.
And lastly, I have never defended NVIDIA. You're welcome to prove otherwise. Being rational about them is not equal to defending them. Not hating them is not defending them. I know it's difficult to be a rabid fan, but other people don't necessarily divide the world into things you hate or love. I just exist. I don't have strong emotions about companies whose only concern is profits. If you believe AMD and Intel are somehow different, you need to reevaluate your worldview.
And if you believe AMD and Intel are somehow more user friendly to open source than NVIDIA, you also need to reevaluate your worldview. Both companies support Linux just enough to make it work. They invest up to 1000 times more money and resources into supporting Windows. Their Windows drivers dwarf their Linux drivers in terms of features. Under Windows HWiNFO64 reports basically nearly 50 times more data about Intel/AMD CPUs/GPUs than what's available under Linux. They have a ton more features than what Linux drivers provide. Open Source fans always forget about that for some reasons. It's pathetic and despicable at the same time. At the same time NVIDIA does not pretend they support Linux any more than they support Windows but they are the only company who shares their codebase between Linux and Windows, which means their driver quality will forever be a lot higher than what Intel or AMD could ever achieve with the kernel drivers and MESA. Why? Because NVIDIA cares and Windows has WHQL. Linux has nada. A broken Intel/AMD GPU commit in the kernel? Who cares? A few releases later you'll get your Intel/AMD GPU working again. No QA/QC whatsoever (TBO Intel has some sort of automated testing but it still results in regressions here and there).
Enjoy your Linux supremacy except there's none. And don't BS me with "AMD/Intel GPU drivers are open, anyone can fix them". That's never been the case. Valve helps AMD only because of the Steam Deck but Valve is not "anyone". GPU drivers nowadays are a lot more complicated than the kernel itself. Process/memory/interrupts/PCI-E bandwidth scheduling + their own compiler and shading language/etc/etc/etc. The average programmer will need months if not years of extensive deep dive just to start hacking them.
Lastly, I've never called you or anyone here an AMD/Intel fanboy. Maybe you could be more respectful to other people. Being anonymous doesn't mean it's OK to be an asshole.

you just spread lies the AMD windows Vulkan driver is shared with the AMDVLK Linux driver.
but you wrongfully claim only Nvidia does share code between linux and windows.

avis honestly you are the most rotten to the core person here in this forum.

[pixo]

Most distros use initramfs because it's easier. No need to worry about drivers and special setups (MD, DM, RAID, encryption, KMS). It also supports compression (so the blob containing all drivers is just 150-200 MB, while custom kernel would be like 10 MB). The early KMS expects the firmware in the bzImage or initramfs. So without firmware you might not be able to see the boot logs.

Aren't the EFI or VGA drivers used before the card specific driver is loaded?
The boot log is printed even without the firmware in initramfs.
When the driver is loaded it just change the resolution to better then what EFI or VGA supports.
I could see the need for systems that don't support those standards but not for PC.

[caligula]

Aren't the EFI or VGA drivers used before the card specific driver is loaded?
The boot log is printed even without the firmware in initramfs.
When the driver is loaded it just change the resolution to better then what EFI or VGA supports.
I could see the need for systems that don't support those standards but not for PC.

Most PC GPUs don't need any drivers to print text mode bootlogs. I suppose most people want the best user experience. The EFI/VESA drivers have shitty performance which can even slow down your boot. They also cause screen flicker in most cases. Simply using a single driver right from the start is the easiest.

[oiaohm]

looks like amd did it way better with atombios approach. but nvidia had to reinvent the wheel and failed.

No the biggest problem is Nvidia firmware itself.

AMD and Intel gpu firmware maintain a stableish ABI.

https://www.phoronix.com/news/Intel-i915-Versioned-Firmware

Yes there are the odd issue with AMD and Intel here and there.

Most of the time with AMD and Intel for GPU the OS kernel driver. firmware and the userspace don't have to be in perfect alignment with Linux. The kernel to userspace due to AMD and Intel drivers being mainline has to play by the Linus rule of do not break user-space..

Nvidia closed source driver. The firmware the kernel driver and the userspace has to be aligned because because there is not a stable ABI at any of those transitions. So in this area Nvidia is decades behind.

[RedEyed]

62 Mb is big for git. Every time the blob is updated - it's + 62 Mb to the repo.

So, after year of updates, one need to git clone every previously pushed version.

There is git lfs, I wonder, is it used?

[mdedetrich]

Nvidia closed source driver. The firmware the kernel driver and the userspace has to be aligned because because there is not a stable ABI at any of those transitions. So in this area Nvidia is decades behind.

You mean that Linux is decades behind because it doesn't have a stable graphics driver ABI. This issue doesn't exist on Windows, nor on Mac when they were using AMD/NVidia.