Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FreeBSD Might Get A Linux Kernel API Wrapper To Help Porting Linux Drivers

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

  • FreeBSD Might Get A Linux Kernel API Wrapper To Help Porting Linux Drivers

    Phoronix: FreeBSD Might Get A Linux Kernel API Wrapper To Help Porting Linux Drivers

    In a discussion about porting the modern Nouveau open-source NVIDIA driver to FreeBSD, it was brought up that a FreeBSD developer is looking at the possibility of introducing a Linux kernel API wrapper to help in porting Linux drivers to FreeBSD...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTgzMjY

  • #2
    If it means better/faster graphics support then I'd be all for it.

    Comment


    • #3
      I guess they could re-use code from something like DDE or OSKit? Not sure about the license tho.
      https://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/dde.html
      http://www.cs.utah.edu/flux/oskit/

      Also this http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/Free...x_bsd_kld.html

      Comment


      • #4
        This is old news, they talked about this at their XDC presentation, along with every other BSD deciding to go this way.

        Comment


        • #5
          now all they need to do is replace the actual BSD kernel and it will be usable

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by peppercats View Post
            now all they need to do is replace the actual BSD kernel and it will be usable
            The FreeBSD kernel is very well designed and in many respects is superior to the Linux kernel. FreeBSD has while Linux has nothing close to it:

            https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/dtrace-enable.html

            Pipeline stall analysis is possible on FreeBSD through Pmcstat while it is not clear if Linux offers a way to do it yet:

            http://www.brendangregg.com/blog/201...me-graphs.html

            Facebook considers FreeBSD's TCP/IP stack to be superior:

            http://bsd-beta.slashdot.org/story/1...od-as-freebsds

            FreeBSD has jails that are secure unlike the chroot command that Linux users often think of being for making jails. It pioneered the concept and is still far ahead in this area even today.

            FreeBSD has an excellent sandboxing framework that Google ported to Linux for Chrome OS:

            http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/sec...m/freebsd.html

            FreeBSD's kernel virtual memory is based on Mach and is far superior to Linux's. To be fair, Linux's kernel virtual memory was intentionally crippled as a design decision by Linux et al.

            FreeBSD also has pf, netmap, ZFS. pf is a well regarded firewall from OpenBSD that is considered easier to use than iptables by those familiar with both. netmap is a way to push packet processing into userland that boosts performance in routing tasks and security. ZFS is a filesystem from OpenSolaris that is also available on Linux, but FreeBSD fully embraces it as a first class filesystem for the rootfs while Linux distributions are not quite there yet.

            Linux unlike FreeBSD has Redhat behind it to fund things like graphics development. Developing graphics drivers for open source operating systems is generally not profitable to companies with the exception of hardware manufacturers who make things that use them. Consequently, most business executives would consider funding things like nouveau to bea waste of money. I assume their executives consider it to be a PR expense meant to generate goodwill. There is nothing about this arrangement that makes Linux fundamentally better than FreeBSD contrary to what your comment seems to imply. It just makes Linux lucky.
            Last edited by ryao; 07 November 2014, 11:48 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by ryao View Post
              The FreeBSD kernel is very well designed and in many respects is superior to the Linux kernel. FreeBSD has while Linux has nothing close to it:

              https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/dtrace-enable.html
              You've just shown how mindless typical BSD zealots like as you are for this post that you have written through your pathetic MacBook Pro. You've ignore the fact that Linux has got far more drivers due to the better design interfaces in Linux and also benckmarks have proven that Linux has faster and more efficient then any crap BSD. Opening Firefox on Linux takes 1 sec. Opening Firefox on FreeBSD takes 30 secs.

              Anyway back on topic, Linux has ftrace, ltrace and strace which together are far more useful then dtrace. Also, Oracle is porting dtrace to Linux:

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DTrace

              Pipeline stall analysis is possible on FreeBSD through Pmcstat while it is not clear if Linux offers a way to do it yet:

              http://www.brendangregg.com/blog/201...me-graphs.html
              Linux has got sysstat. No need for some obsolete monitoring crap that only works on VAX.

              http://sebastien.godard.pagesperso-orange.fr/

              Facebook considers FreeBSD's TCP/IP stack to be superior:

              http://bsd-beta.slashdot.org/story/1...od-as-freebsds
              That rumor was proven false, the actual comments from the facebook developer is that the FreeBSD stack is terribly written code and inferior to Linux.

              http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showt...270#post447270

              FreeBSD has jails that are secure unlike the chroot command that Linux users often think of being for making jails. It pioneered the concept and is still far ahead in this area even today.
              Ever heard of LXC and OpenVZ? They beat the crap out of BSD jails and Solaris zones.

              FreeBSD has an excellent sandboxing framework that Google ported to Linux for Chrome OS:

              http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/sec...m/freebsd.html
              Linux already had docker for a long time. So suck on that.

              FreeBSD's kernel virtual memory is based on Mach and is far superior to Linux's. To be fair, Linux's kernel virtual memory was intentionally crippled as a design decision by Linux et al.
              Er.. Wrong. The Mach virtual memory system is far inferior to Linux's. It's the main reason why FreeBSD is far slower then Linux. Remember the 30 sec waiting time to open Firefox? that's the Mach virtual at work. Linus' virtual mem system as of today has no equal.

              FreeBSD also has pf, netmap, ZFS. pf is a well regarded firewall from OpenBSD that is considered easier to use than iptables by those familiar with both. netmap is a way to push packet processing into userland that boosts performance in routing tasks and security.
              Linux's iptables are way more flexible and useful in real life situations that OpenBSD's pf crap and also, Linus has netmap (https://code.google.com/p/netmap/) and Linux also has ZFS but that is irrelevant as Linux also has BTRFS.

              ZFS is a filesystem from OpenSolaris that is also available on Linux, but FreeBSD fully embraces it as a first class filesystem for the rootfs while Linux distributions are not quite there yet.
              Linux can also use ZFS as rootfs and it is more suited to handling Sun's bloated piece of crap then FreeBSD is due to more efficiency and the better virtual memory system in Linux. But as I said, ZFS is bull crap and BTRFS is now here and it's going to be Linux only. I won't be surprised if BSD devs try to create a BSD licensed work-a-like to BTRFS once they realized how crap ZFS is a how got BTRFS is.

              Linux unlike FreeBSD has Redhat behind it to fund things like graphics development. Developing graphics drivers for open source operating systems is generally not profitable to companies with the exception of hardware manufacturers who make things that use them. Consequently, most business executives would consider funding things like nouveau to bea waste of money. I assume their executives consider it to be a PR expense meant to generate goodwill. There is nothing about this arrangement that makes Linux fundamentally better than FreeBSD contrary to what your comment seems to imply. It just makes Linux lucky.
              FreeBSD has iXsystems behind it and yet that is no contribution to BSD development from it. Why? Because of the BSD license. For Linux Redhat nows no one will steal their code (only improve it) due to the GPL license. But for iXsystems, BSD license offers them no protection except the one in which weaker prisoners get in exchange for dropping the soap for stronger prisoners.

              Comment


              • #8
                The Linux fanboyism is so apparent here. BSD has superior networking, filesystem, security and works better as a router appliance. No amount of shitposting or shitflinging will change that. Deal with it.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by lolnope View Post
                  The Linux fanboyism is so apparent here. BSD has superior networking, filesystem, security and works better as a router appliance. No amount of shitposting or shitflinging will change that. Deal with it.
                  I'm pretty sure it's GNU fanboyism actually on Endman's part

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Why not createa BSDkit?

                    Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
                    I'm pretty sure it's GNU fanboyism actually on Endman's part
                    Where all BSDs could contribute. DDEKit has enough there.

                    IOKit is an answer also.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X