If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
I dont think Samsung is opensource company. I think it is like Oracle or Microsoft. Why? Because their Bada OS, is, unlike Android, closed source proprietary. And its kernel is copypasted and closed BSD kernel (stolen, but BSD people are such happy sheep, loving to be food for wolves).
Short and fast, samsung is garbage.
There's a rumour today that Samsung and LG will develop a new, open smartphone system with financial help from South Korea.
In my opinion there are too many misconceptions about graphics on ARM platforms so let's sort a few things out.
You don't make an ARM SoC for a phone or a tablet the way you make a PC. The GPU is not a self contained unit that you plug in to a free PCI-Express slot.
Some components of a PC GPU that you would expect to be packaged together will on a SoC be a set of separate IPs that can be licenced from completely different IP vendors and integrated as part of the SoC by the SoC manufacturer.
* Memory (shared with the rest of the SoC).
* Display Controller (drives the LCD)
* 3D graphics IP
* Video decoder
* 2D blitting hardware
These are all separate IPs and a 3D graphics IP like ARM's Mali-400 on the Samsung EXYNOS4210 is a memory to memory device that will render to a memory region (the framebuffer) that is read by the display controller.
The DRM driver Samsung has made covers memory buffer sharing through GEM and scanning out buffers to the LCD throught the display controller using KMS on their SoC. It doesn't even touch the 3D graphics IP so the whole discussion about Open Source user space and Mesa/Gallium3D is not relevant in this case.
As for "big mess" with embedded GPUs - ARM (Mali), Imagination (PowerVR), Qualcomm (Adreno) all have GPL kernel drivers which is more than you can say about e.g. nVidia or AMD on the x86 front. (AMD supports developers of open driver, but don't provide any themselvs.)
Maybe because it's simpler & smaller and does all they need? (I'm answering the general question here, I don't know why they did in this case.)
They need *nix kernel and the best kernel is linux. It can be made smaller as they see fit and recieves way more attention.
Even then, why close it and all around BADA down?
They want closed source kernel, that:
1) helps copy-paste other source (ie steal), so no one can track it down and sue them
2) helps cover same code, but its patented, so no one can sue them
3) they want that "technological advantage", same way as microsoft, nvidia, apple and amd. The only good guy here was google
4) they don?t want people to use the phone as they see fit. They don?t want people to remove pre-installed spyware and governmental spying
Unlike crappy samsung, google just purchased motorola with its IP and got all problems solved whilst retaining full open-source model(except for some of google own spying applications, on which they base their income; but they allow completely-opensource system drop-in replacement).
I was hooked on to arm very strom 1 or 2 years ago. There was this plug-pcs and stuff there. It looked good no windows support cheap and low power consumption and for much stuff it seemed fast enough. And I thought if they dont support windows they have to support Linux very good. That was a wrong conclusion.
The grafics stack suck, no open 3d support, good that disqualifies arm for me for desktop devices. But ok there are still some server-tasks that devices could do, but again fail, 1. plugpcs are a danger of your home because they are so shity designed that creating a fire in your home is one feature. Then even if you want to risk that, they are pretty slow a pentium 3 would be faster. so ok there are other devices that are not that risky designes. lets look at the nases, what do we have the interesting devises < 150,- have all maximaly 256mb ram, thats way to less and this at times where you can buy 8gb ram for 30 bugs or so.
And then there is fusion from amd, with as example zacate uses 20 instead of 10 watts and is nearly as cheap but makes no problems is freely configurable (8gb ram can be installed) so why the hell should I use arm for more than my mobile and my wlan-router, as much as I can I will avoid arm, because they just suck and want to fight linux with no 3d drivers and stuff.
as much as I can I will avoid arm, because they just suck and want to fight linux with no 3d drivers and stuff.
The vast majority of GPUs in shipping ARM systems come from Imagination Technologies (SGX in the high and now medium end devices, MBX for very low end stuff, typically not too much more than QVGA and doing simple scenes rather than image composition), not from ARM Ltd.
If the answer is that they don?t like linux architecture, why would they take *nix like kernel?
For many reasons ranging from not needing the complexity or the bulk of a "more advanced" kernel and proper access to technologies and features not found in the linux kernel some of which is because incompatible licensing.
Its because they wanted linux,
but they wanted it proprietary.
It's more like they didn't want to be restricted to the terms of the GPL which is a valid concern for many reasons.
And here comes BSD deepsheep, eat us alive, yeah!
I'll also point out that there is a crapload of devices and projects that utilize GPL code that are not it compliance. GPL doesn't do sweet squat until someone has the time and financial ability to protect those terms. Like I said before, I guarantee you that you have personally benefited from a permissive license. In fact I guarantee you that your linux system has a lot of code uses such licenses. That is the great thing about BSD like licenses is that it allows EVERYONE to utilize it, not just a select group.