Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Canonical Is Using Android Drivers For Ubuntu Mir

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

  • panda84
    replied
    Binary drivers = fixed kernel version

    Originally posted by ultimA View Post
    That article is a pretty long explanation of a simple reason: Mobile drivers are much more often than not closed source, especially GPU drivers. Canonical seems to try to come up with all kinds of technical reasons like "good power management" and "rock solid" and blabla, but the truth is, they simply just didn't have any other choice.
    There's a big downside on relying on binary driver: more often than not you'll be stuck with a fixed kernel version, and you'll not be able to upgrade. Android Jelly Bean, which is the latest public Android release and is installed in roughly 25% of the devices (http://developer.android.com/about/d...rds/index.html) is generally using kernel 3.0, 3.2, or at maximum 3.4. But 3.9 is just out of the door.
    And you have no guarantee that your device manufacturer will upgrade your phone software to the latest version.
    So, no Canonical, I'm not interested in another Poulsbo mess.

    Leave a comment:


  • kaprikawn
    replied
    Canonical using other people's code. Colour me shocked.

    Leave a comment:


  • ultimA
    replied
    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: Why Canonical Is Using Android Drivers For Ubuntu Mir

    With Canonical's Mir Display Server for future releases of Ubuntu Linux, they are supporting Android's graphics layer and drivers rather than inventing their own solution.... Why did they do this?

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTM0NjQ
    That article is a pretty long explanation of a simple reason: Mobile drivers are much more often than not closed source, especially GPU drivers. Canonical seems to try to come up with all kinds of technical reasons like "good power management" and "rock solid" and blabla, but the truth is, they simply just didn't have any other choice.

    Leave a comment:


  • tacco
    replied
    Originally posted by xeekei View Post
    Where did they say this? I must've missed it.
    Yes, it's referred to this article....but it doesn't say that the support will start with Wayland! I wouldn't be surprised if Nvidia , above all, will accept the challange. But Canonical has to prove that there will be an advantage with Mir! Let's wait!
    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...tem&px=MTMyMTI
    Last edited by tacco; 04-09-2013, 01:36 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • steveriley
    replied
    From the article...

    Drivers and hardware support are the foundation of a well performing, amazing computing experience. With Mir and Ubuntu Next, we?re not building our house upon sand, we?re building it upon rock!
    A "super excited!" bit of breathlessness straight out of the Microsoft marketing playbook and a comparison to a biblical parable drawn straight from a collection of iron age fairy tales. Uh, wait, did I just repeat myself?

    Leave a comment:


  • xeekei
    replied
    Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
    They haven't said anything about Mir at all. NVidia has said they were part way along getting an EGL driver out, for Wayland.
    Where did they say this? I must've missed it.

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by pdffs View Post
    And, correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't nVidia/ATI just talking about implementing OpenGL ES support, rather than Mir support specifically?
    They haven't said anything about Mir at all. NVidia has said they were part way along getting an EGL driver out, for Wayland. And Canonical has said they are in talks with both NVidia and AMD, but we've heard nothing from the other direction.

    I highly suspect whatever EGL driver comes out will support both Wayland and Mir, with minimal changes necessary. And if it doesn't, i highly suspect Mir will change until it does, because those drivers are going to target Wayland first and foremost because they are meant for the enterprise versions that end up in corporations, not tablets or desktops.
    Last edited by smitty3268; 04-09-2013, 12:23 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • pdffs
    replied
    Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
    So what is it that SurfaceFlinger doesn't provide that Mir will?
    Desktop support.

    Obviously if even Google couldn't force hardware vendors to provide open drivers, using the existing Android interfaces was the only sane choice for rapid release, but Ubuntu's NIH syndrome still disgusts me. I'm happy to see other, properly open, projects drag their heels merging Mir support.

    And, correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't nVidia/ATI just talking about implementing OpenGL ES support, rather than Mir support specifically?

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Why not just use SurfaceFlinger

    I mean, it's clear at this point the whole Ubuntu project is focused on phone/tablets. And their essentially trying to build as much off Android as possible with different systems and APIs.

    So what is it that SurfaceFlinger doesn't provide that Mir will?

    Leave a comment:


  • AnonymousCoward
    replied
    I can't help but wonder if by the time Mir is stable that Intel Atom with HD graphics will be the "OMG gotta have it" of tablets.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X