HDMI Forum Closing Public Specification Access Is Hurting Open-Source GPU Drivers

[oiaohm]

The prerequisite for obtaining the DisplayPort specification legally is to become a VESA member, which also requires payment

Fact this is not exactly the case.

https://hdmiforum.org/join-us/ First is cost HDMI forum is a flat 15000 and Vesa is 5000 for small and 10000 for large.

But not everything you need for DisplayPort is locked away.

https://vesa.org/vesa-standards/

Yes they write at the top here new DIsplayPort standards are locked away. Then the compression, Activesync.... All the bits that you need to implement in userspace/kenrel drivers vesa goes and releases without needing membership.

To make a full DIsplayport device (silicon/circuits) from scratch you need Vista membership. To have the information you need to be able to write a driver to use a Displayport hardware you don't need Vesa membership.

There is bit of a difference here. Lower cost for Vesa membership and Vesa releasing bits of specifications driver developers need. Vesa does not go and release all the bits hardware developers need.

[Entzilla]

Looking at the news today pointing to this trainwreck of a decision https://www.phoronix.com/news/HDMI-2.1-OSS-Rejected :

Well this in 2024 is fuc**ing laughable still.. AMD please just drop this closed sourced weakass input std and f'in let the hdmi -"hug"-circle experience a slow and uneventfull demise

Would be fun if @rossmanngroup picked up on this

[starbg]

Learn your history folks. Apple doesn't pay royalties it doesn't have to. It charges royalties.
Apple doesn't/didn't support BluRayvplayback over licensing costs and restrictions.
Apple pushed for and only supports DP because they didn't want to pay HDMI royalties and restrictions. In fact in the early days DP was a straight up equivalent of HDMI. It's only recently that its come to surpass HDMI.

The prerequisite for obtaining the DisplayPort specification legally is to become a VESA member, which also requires payment

[starbg]

It has always been closed. If you want to use HDMI on linux you need to run it with a binary blob (which is why we have diferent kernels, the fully FOSS ones and the standar kernel that has plenty of blobs). Displayport is a more capable conector which is fully open source. However most TV and display companies have deals with the HDMI corporation, so they use that connector, and many people get mad at DP saying it's garbage because none of their devices have it, even on this thread there are people saying HDMI is the best choice because their TVs are HDMI...

This article is about the spec documentation, the HDMI spec (not the code or the blobs, just the full long spec-sheet) was always detailed, but they took it down and you need to contact the HDMI guys with valid proper reasons and the might send it to you by mail. This means any developer trying to do anything with HDMI doesn't have proper access, while companies that pay the license get the documentation included.

I understand why devices like the raspberry pi use HDMI, so more people can adopt them, but honestly they should just go DP and have users buy an adapter cable if needed...

I hope you have not been misled by some "encyclopedias". No matter the specifications of HDMI or DisplayPort are commercial secrets, the published specifications of DisplayPort can be regarded as illegal leaks.

[mppix]

Main problem seems to be that there is no clarity if an open-source driver implementation is considered a disclosure.
I'd be expecting that Intel, AMD, and possibly some smart TV manufacturers using Linux would be putting some weight behind it being allowed to write such drivers.

Worst case we need DP/HDMI2.1 adapters

[ezekrb5]

I agree with you. But I've always been on the pragmatic side.
Would it be better if we can slowly adopt a different standard that is free and open source? Sure. But in the meantime, we have to live with what already exists and is here to stay for another 10 or 15 years given the market penetration of the equipment.

Absolutely agree, I have a TV I use for movie-wathing and light gaming when friends come around on weekends, and it's hdmi only. I'm not replacing that TV anytime soon.
However on my personal system I have a 144hz displayport monitor I got recently, I was able to run parabola, and I have no HDMI driver on the system, it's actually pretty sweet.
For the meantime we have to adapt with what we got, but hopefully the future is brighter for better open standards.

[anarki2]

Well it's a patented standard, what would you expect. But of course, we still don't have TVs and consoles with DisplayPort/Thunderbolt 4, because HDMI is "the industry standard". Yay...

[coder]

How about promoting a clause to be included in as many open source licenses as possible, which will disallow using this software by companies and organizations which promote closed standards thus limiting open source software they already use? For example HDMI Forum using WordPress would not be allowed to use it if both GNUv2 and GNUv3 would be adjusted accordingly in the next version iteration and software using it would agree to "upgrade" the license.

That sounds like a very tricky needle to thread, legally. You wouldn't want to make it so broad that any organization or company with any proprietary products or services couldn't use free software, or else that would be incredibly damaging to the free software community.

Also, I think you might overestimate the amount of leverage the free software community has. There are still proprietary alternatives that they could adopt, if subjected to such conditions.

The best solution to the problem of restrictive, closed standards is probably to follow the playbook of the AV1 consortium and just create competing standards that are free and open. Obviously, that's not perfect, as it doesn't address the messy transitional phase.

[megamix]

How about promoting a clause to be included in as many open source licenses as possible, which will disallow using this software by companies and organizations which promote closed standards thus limiting open source software they already use? For example HDMI Forum using WordPress would not be allowed to use it if both GNUv2 and GNUv3 would be adjusted accordingly in the next version iteration and software using it would agree to "upgrade" the license.

[Mez']

10m does not have to be portable. In fact I would say you most likely not using it portable a lot just from my experenices.



This is why I end up fixing so much broken. Remember a 10m in a cafe/bar/pubs can have gone though wall.


Practicality and cheap not as straight forwards than what it seams. In a portable solution the fact cat6/7 will roll tighter than hdmi copper or optical means you have less cable breakages caused by put up and take down. The short hdmi at each end are easy to replace individually from the extenders and being under 2 meters are simpler to handle safely. The longer the cable when putting up and packing down the more likely it is to kink it this is where cat6/7 tolerance can come critical as well. Yes the higher power in cable of the extenders can deal with copper in the cat6/7 being damaged past the point that in a hdmi cable would cause a signal failure due to higher resistance caused by damage.

There is a difference between what is the practical, reliable and the cheap this is generally a case where you can only pick 2 for the long term.

You seem to speak from experience and I'm sure you have seen plenty. I still think you overestimate the will of average Joe's to delve into this and find alternative solutions (as good as they may be).
I will look into this if I ever need a long cable again, although I would still pay attention to my wallet.

And yes, I've taken my beamer to some places (pro presentation, LAN parties or friends for football - as in soccer - games).

Yes this is the horrible world of dongle https://www.amazon.com.au/Plugable-D.../dp/B00S0C7QO8

AMD really could if they wanted to say screw it no new card of ours will have a HDMI port on it you want to connect something HDMI you have to use a dongle from display port. Same with those making monitors /tv could go screw it as well if they wanted to on HDMI and say HDMI is now a use a dongle item.

Mez this is a long like extenders people don't think about these things the reality changing from one standard to the next can be quite quick. Its really simple to forgot how fast many countries changed from analog tv to digital with the set top boxes what when you think about it was just another version of a dongle.

The dongle solution is kind of the universal solution to take items using legacy protocols discontinued and connect them to modern day.

If you've bought a 1000-1500$ TV, a 400-500$ P4 or P5, a 600/700$ AV receiver and a 4K projector (or even 2K or 1440p) in the last 5 years, a BR player, or you got a TV decoder from your Internet provider, a brand new laptop, etc...
I don't think you intend to replace all of them any time soon. Also, it's an ecological nightmare. I just replaced my 9 yo laptop, the new one has HDMI and only USB-C to DP (but DP is already taken on the monitor). I still have my Antec HTPC case from around 2005 as my main computer case, my phone is 3 yo, my tablet is 5 yo, my AV receiver is 7 yo (but 4K60 passthrough compatible, yoohoo). I bought a TV less than 2 years ago.

The standard will be adopted slowly when people replace their equipment (soundbars or AV receivers are tightly linked to your TV, plus with HDMI you get ARC which is an absolute necessity for Netflix if you don't want the crappy 2.0 sound of your TV). And you only buy a new TV every 10-15-20 years. Maybe some adapters can do the trick but then it's another mess to look into with many potential issues of compatibility (ARC, HDMI version, pass-through, splits, etc...)
Even with all its benefits, DP has barely been adopted at home level beside PC enthusiasts. At pro level, it's better but probably not even at 50%. And it's been around for years.
I really doubt the change will be quite quick