Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Google Begins Upstreaming Fuchsia OS Support Into Mesa 3D

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

  • #21
    Another cool hip microkernel system which will die a slow death or become a bastardized hybrid kernel system as the rest did.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by sarmad View Post
      Why a single company develops three separate operating systems (ChromeOS, Android, Fuschia) is beyond my comprehension.
      Three OSs for three different market segments.

      ChromeOS for something almost like a PC, based on a linux kernel. Has a near-fully-fledged desktop linux experience.

      Android, also based on linux but is intended for phones. Has an almost totally custom userspace oriented to touchscreen interaction and apps and app isolation.

      Fuschia, a custom OS for hardware that is too low-spec to run linux. If you need a smart speaker that doesn't do anything more than relay speaker/mic audio over the network, this is the OS for you. It's better than writing one-off baremetal firmware.
      Last edited by Developer12; 08 June 2024, 01:55 PM.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by zester View Post

        ​​Chromebooks are used in most schools in the United States and is given to kids as a school laptop, replacing traditional paper books.
        Wait - but they still do handwriting, don't they?

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by coder View Post
          Citation needed.

          If you follow this site, Michael is reporting on Linux ripping out support for platforms much newer than that, left and right.
          It's mostly proposals to rip stuff out, and usually the stuff that's actually removed is older generations of architectures that are still reasonably popular, like early versions of powerPC or old weird x86_32 processors. This is usually when it proves to be a pain for current development. Ironically it's the quieter architectures that tend to stick around longer.

          Have you even looked at the list of architectures linux still supports?

          It comes up whenever someone asks about putting rust in core kernel code. There are shitloads of architectures (c6x, csky, H8300, microblaze, nds32, nios2, openrisc, parisc, sh (superH), and xtensa, for example [1]) that linux and GCC still support but which aren't supported by and often predate LLVM, creating a problem for rust development.

          Despite a bunch of complaining from rust folks, none of these architectures have been dropped except for itanium, and everyone really hated itanium.

          [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20240429...ust/issues/112
          Last edited by Developer12; 08 June 2024, 02:12 AM.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by Developer12 View Post

            It doesn't really matter if this ships on google home. Shipping in a product is shipping in a product, even if it's not a PC. A lot of the drivers in MESA are for random phone SoCs.

            That said, I'm not sure if fuchsia has actually shipped yet in something that has a screen.
            Nest Hub 1st and 2nd gen as well as Nest Hub Max is running Fuchsia.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by Developer12 View Post
              The only indication here is that they're using lavapipe, a software renderer. If they're using that at all, it's probably pretty unlikely that they have a real vulkan driver working, and that makes perfect sense for an OS as immature as fushsia. It's a simple and lightweight solution compared to redox's VMs [1] or manually reimplementing a ton of hardware drivers, even if it means bad GPU performance.

              [1] RedoxOS are in a similar boat, being a new microkernel OS, but don't want software rendering and don't want to reimplement all the kernel drivers. They're taking the highly unconventional step of (I think?) building mini linux VMs just to reuse linux's drivers.
              they literally added gfxstream to mesa partially because of fuscia OS, gfxstream is even mentioned in the PR.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by coder View Post
                I'm not sure whether they started Fuchsia before ChromeOS, but then it clearly wasn't ready by the time they decided they needed ChromeOS.

                Maybe they were planning on replacing both of the other two with Fuchsia? Can you comprehend that?
                ChromeOS is much older than Fuchsia. It was released about a year after Chrome, around 2010.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Fuchsia is alive, hooray! I thought Google had buried it.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by Developer12 View Post
                    Three OSs for three different market segments.

                    ChromeOS for something almost like a PC, ...

                    Android, also based on linux but is intended for phones. ...

                    ChromeOS, a custom OS for hardware that is too low-spec to run linux. ...
                    Did you make a typo, or did those jerks reuse the ChromeOS name for two completely different operating systems?

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by Developer12 View Post
                      It's mostly proposals to rip stuff out,
                      Deprecations are more than proposals. It's an announcement that support is going away in the next kernel release.

                      Originally posted by Developer12 View Post
                      ​and usually the stuff that's actually removed is older generations of architectures that are still reasonably popular, like early versions of powerPC or old weird x86_32 processors.
                      Obviously, most of the examples are going to be weird offshoots, like Xeon Phi, just because there are a lot more of those than distinct ISAs, but there are other examples like IA64.

                      Originally posted by Developer12 View Post
                      ​​There are shitloads of architectures (c6x, csky, H8300, microblaze, nds32, nios2, openrisc, parisc, sh (superH), and xtensa, for example [1])
                      The kernel's policy is just that each architecture have an active maintainer, the presumption being that if someone is willing & able to maintain it, then it must still be relevant. But what Daktyl198 said was quite different.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X