Imagination Working On A New Open-Source Linux Graphics Driver Project

[CommunityMember]

And a code release of this new driver assumes that the legal department signs off on it. After all, they have to protect their proprietary property.

Sometimes the problem is that the IP may not the companies to release, even if they are willing. While no one knows the details, it has been often been asserted that a lot of the various GPU manufacturers licensed some parts of their platform from others, and the company is not free to release it as is. And for better or worse, the entire video (and audio) codec world is a minefield of patents. Those that want the code to just be released should finish their JD and apply to work at the companies to make it a possibility.

[duby229]

this will again result in nothing. If they would just have released register level specifications we would have already a fine open source driver a decade ago. Wonder why they still don't want to do that and have skilled people work on this. Also. even if this employee gets something working, it will be a pain to maintain without any open specifications.

It'll probably be something like what fglrx was, with the exception that some of the code will be available. It'll be a disaster.

[duby229]

No, usually vendor drivers are low quality, Windows style code mess, that needs major rewrites and cleanups to meet minimal code quality levels and be accepted upstream.

Yup, exactly what my last post was trying to imply.

[Space Heater]

It'll probably be something like what fglrx was, with the exception that some of the code will be available. It'll be a disaster.

While that is a possibility, I don't think we need to immediately assume the worst when a company appears to make a step in the right direction.

[rene]

While that is a possibility, I don't think we need to immediately assume the worst when a company appears to make a step in the right direction.

because we already know the drill from this companies who have done nothing for 20 years and left countless of Intel GMA500 / Pulsbou UMPC without graphic acceleration as well as countless, even popular, like Ti BeagleBoard and phones and such without open source graphic acceleration. And again, that they only want an employee and not simply start by releasing hardware register level specs is already the first indication that this bullshit will continue. And without proper documentation it is a nightmare if not impossible to review and maintain should there ever be a code release. Just look at xf86-video-nv and the -nouveau REWRITE because it was so badly magic number mangled and other drivers like that. Stop buying such hardware and assuming the best. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-VMQqxVy7I

[Guest]

No, usually vendor drivers are low quality, Windows style code mess, that needs major rewrites and cleanups to meet minimal code quality levels and be accepted upstream.

Isn't that only true for closed source vendor drivers? Usually, OSS drivers are of much better quality. As, they also need to comply with quality standards, in order to get merged to kernel. For example, AMD driver was very rejected at first attempt to get merged...

[rene]

Isn't that only true for closed source vendor drivers? Usually, OSS drivers are of much better quality. As, they also need to comply with quality standards, in order to get merged to kernel. For example, AMD driver was very rejected at first attempt to get merged...

Isn't that what I was saying what you are confirming? Plus all the other questionable quality network and such drivers out of vendor factories needed a more or less complete rewrite before they meet a reaonsable quality standard and can be accepted upstream, ...?

[timofonic]

(This is my opinion; and despite my assertive tone I might be wrong).

The real, only reason: Imagination has been forced to make this choice by a company to which it wanted to sell its GPU. So they don't want open source ; they just need it.

Welcome to the real world! The truth is that we live in an evil world. Free/Open Source Software success is because it's cheaper and better, not because of ideological reasons.

Corporations want Open Source because it gives more revenue to them, nothing else matters. IBM does it, others will follow this trend if they consider better for their profits.

Wake up, please

[Guest]

If they support older hardware too, that would be great for the Nexus Player and several Android phones and tablets that used Intel Atom SoCs + PowerVR GPUs.

[Guest]

Welcome to the real world! The truth is that we live in an evil world. Free/Open Source Software success is because it's cheaper and better, not because of ideological reasons.

Corporations want Open Source because it gives more revenue to them, nothing else matters. IBM does it, others will follow this trend if they consider better for their profits.

Wake up, please

They also love open source because of how much control and insight they have over their devices. But they don't want to provide that to customers who buy their devices.

For example, Facebook said they liked open firmware, because of how much control they had over their servers. But they don't want to provide the same amount of control to the users of their Portal devices.