Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bickering Continues About NVIDIA Using DMA-BUF

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

  • Originally posted by RCL_ View Post
    Maybe. However AMD hardware has had open documentation for years and their OSS drivers are still behind proprietary ones, let alone AMD Windows drivers, so I wouldn't hold my breath.
    This isn't completely true, there are legal problems slowing down the developement, look at this: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...tem&px=MTE3ODg. Said this there are very few developers on AMD open driver, very much less than the ones employed for the blob.

    Comment


    • Hmm, speaking of licensing, I wonder... Would it theoretically be possible to have a "half-closed" driver? Say, open-source bits that are yours, and leave a part of the code that isn't yours as closed-source. For things like Catalyst it's not that good idea since there is no real distinction between the two, I assume, but if, say, a new company came into play, had drivers on Windows and wanted to port them to Linux, and did that keeping this strategy in mind, the result might be interesting. Maybe it could even be considered to be generally open-source and could use all the kernel functionality, and the closed part of it could be an "optional add-on".

      Comment


      • Originally posted by asdx
        Are they paying engineers to work in open source graphics drivers and Mesa full-time? I doubt it.
        You doubt wrong

        We've had full time developers working in the open source graphics drivers and mesa since the end of 2007. Two full time devs from 2008 through 2011, two more added last year, and one more this year for a total of 5 full time.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by XorEaxEax View Post
          If the GPU market on Linux was that of the end user desktop then you would never have had any driver support from NVidia, if you want to thank anyone for being able to run NVidia proprietary drivers on your Linux desktop then it should be directed at those companies in the aforementioned HPC/3D/SFX field who said that 'we are moving our production pipelines/computing clusters to Linux, if you want to sell us GPU's then supply Linux drivers', NVidia did not start supporting Linux because they think Linux is great, they started supporting Linux because companies they want to sell GPU's to think Linux is great.
          Thanks for the reassuring info.

          I always wondered what makes NVidia keep their Linux drivers full-featured and contributed that to post-SGI inertia (with NVidia being SGI continuator in some markets). If there are indeed big customers voting for desktop Linux with their dollars, then I'm looking more optimistically at this fight over DMA-BUF

          Personally, I work in gamedev and Linux is an alien in this industry. I've never seen Linux desktop being used *at work*, and artists are generally hostile (or at best, indifferent) towards the OS.

          Comment


          • go alan cox hmm I even saw him one time on the linux day so what nvidia-linux-deskop users dont get, if you completly give up freedom to help companies to release their blobs and maybe even get linux more users or so. you loose what made linux important.

            So if you give up completly the freedom you lost whats most important about linux. Yes Linus makes compromises. I dont agree totaly to that.

            I am more a freesoftware than opensource guy. But I also make some compromises, I use a mobile not like rms ^^. But at least I try to as far as reasonable without loosing to much comfort or funktionality.
            So I can understand a bit, why in earlier days where linux was a smaller player, this compromises about enforcing the gpl or not were made. To allow blobs that are dependend to the linux kernel.

            But today its different, Nvidia really gets big problems if they cant use their blob anymore. and amd and intel have opensource drivers. So they dont get that much problems.
            At least hold this line, I would go further and just dont work with nvidia anymore till they send opensource patches or something like that.

            Right now Amd maybe gets 0 cent of releasing opnesource linux drivers. Because blobs that violates the gpl are allowed.
            If most linuxusers which dont want intel gpus for some reason, would by amd grafics cards because they have the better (free) drivers, maybe amd would hire more developers for the free driver or at least reassign some of the fglrx guys.

            That really would help linux and would increase the pressure against nvidia.

            Today there is no advantage for grafics companies to use free drivers it seems. Or why do we see mostly only closed drivers.

            The next pesty drivers will be all the arm socks that are all closed (at least the 3d part). So now the linux devs could stop this insanity and user-controllablity.

            They even make their hands dirty when they allow this companies to enslave more users.
            Last edited by blackiwid; 10-19-2012, 03:42 PM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by bridgman View Post
              You doubt wrong

              We've had full time developers working in the open source graphics drivers and mesa since the end of 2007. Two full time devs from 2008 through 2011, two more added last year, and one more this year for a total of 5 full time.


              So its your responsibility the crappy open drivers and the bad optimizers? Or your bosses decide this on purpose? And anyway the most of the job is there (MESA, Intel's), there is not excuse. And why is really important: I can't play for example TERA_online with Catalyst and an 1.2Tflops HD4800 via WINE (multiple D3D errors). Now this card will never do it because you discontinue support, so?

              Comment


              • If NVIDIA turns their back on Linux kernel, then it is game over for desktop Linux. GAME. OVER. That's why shutting up zealots like Cox or Torvalds is a priority.
                Last edited by ворот93; 10-19-2012, 06:45 PM.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by ворот93 View Post
                  If NVIDIA turns their back on Linux kernel, then it is game over for desktop Linux. GAME. OVER. That's why shutting up zealots like Cox or Torvalds is a priority.
                  shooting up zealots like Cox or Torvalds ? are you MAD ?

                  People like you these hate speech people really need a bulled.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by necro-lover View Post
                    shooting up zealots like Cox or Torvalds ? are you MAD ?

                    People like you these hate speech people really need a bulled.
                    Is this the true level of literacy among open source faggots?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by ворот93 View Post
                      If NVIDIA turns their back on Linux kernel, then it is game over for desktop Linux. GAME. OVER. That's why shutting up zealots like Cox or Torvalds is a priority.
                      Ok, even if I disagree with their stance a bit, this would seriously not work.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X