Slashdot Mirror


Writing a Linux Device Driver on Company Time?

DriverSubversion asks: "Excuse the anonymity: I'm covering my back and that of my company. My company makes some USB and PCI peripherals, currently only supported under Windows. Several of us have pointed out that there is a large cross-over between the people who buy these things and the people who run linux - and thus it's in the company's best interest to develop device drivers for Linux,as well as Windows. Now while our boss is kind of convinced that this might sell some more units, he understandably wants to know how much it will cost to write and maintain the drivers... and where better to ask than here? So has anyone else gone though this? On scale of 1-10, how hard is it, (1 being 'extremely easy, 2 programmers could do it' and 10 is 'a team of no less than 20 programmers, lawyers and salesmen'). Keep in mind that our intent is to keep the code up-to-date, GPL-compliant and in at least some major distributions."

25 of 65 comments (clear)

  1. I have no idea by CableModemSniper · · Score: 5, Funny

    But I want some shiny new drivers, so I'll say its a 1.

    --
    Why not fork?
    1. Re:I have no idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Perhaps a quick visit to the SciTech Website would be in order I am running their SciTech SNAP Graphics for Linux driver(s) currently... from what they say on the site they support 200 graphics cards in their OS/2 product and around 125 in their Linux product. So it would appear that they would be a good group to speak with... by the way I am running an i865 on one system and an ATI rage on the other and the same driver works great on both - may even be faster than the XFree86 drivers! you can find contact information for SciTech here:

      http://www.scitechsoft.com

      from my experience their support team is very good and can most likely give you some answers

  2. reading by The+Clockwork+Troll · · Score: 5, Informative

    This book might shed some insight.

    --

    There are no karma whores, only moderation johns
    1. Re:reading by trendyhendy · · Score: 5, Informative

      And you can read the whole thing for free here.

    2. Re:reading by Yohahn · · Score: 5, Informative

      With this book, if your devices aren't anything too obscure (i.e. it fits in a traditional class of device) it will be easy. It is a fairly straight forward book.

      (You may also want to look at the porting to the 2.6 kernel series that has been written over at Linux Weekly News As an aside, I'd really advocate subscribing there.)

      When your device is a new class of device that linux isn't used to, it can be harder (e.g. when the phonejack cards came to linux, a new api for them had to be made).

      Note, I've only limited experience, but this is what I've observed.

    3. Re:reading by trouser · · Score: 3, Informative

      I was about to post the same thing. This is a seriously useful book. Some excellent examples which will enabled a C programmer familiar with the standard tools (ummm, GCC and a text editor) to write a skeleton driver and hook it into the kernel in no time. Then all that stands between you and freedom is stealing an intergalactic space craft.

      --
      Now wash your hands.
  3. USB drivers are pretty easy by n1ywb · · Score: 3, Funny

    For part of my college senior project I developed a linux USB device driver. It wasn't too bad, working on it part time I went from nothing to something that I could probably release in about two weeks. It was the first real linux device driver or USB project I had ever worked on. Of course I kick ass daily.

    --
    -73, de n1ywb
    www.n1ywb.com
  4. It's pretty easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    One programmer could write a usb driver for your device in a matter of days. The hardest, absolutely the hardest thing about writing a driver for linux is getting the docs on the chip, and those docs being complete and accurate.

    Maintenance is very easy, however 2.0 -> 2.2 you'll have to do something, 2.2 -> 2.4 you'll have to do something, 2.4 -> 2.6 you'll have to do something, 2.6 -> 2.8...the linux croud delights in changing everything around. Revisionist thinking and all--if it's clean now it was never ugly, dirty code before. The cleanest code in linux is in the device drivers themselves. The infrastructure the device drivers use is, well, less than fresh. And if anyone tells you RTFM ask them where is TFM?

    1. Re:It's pretty easy by leviramsey · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Maintenance is very easy, however 2.0 -> 2.2 you'll have to do something, 2.2 -> 2.4 you'll have to do something, 2.4 -> 2.6 you'll have to do something, 2.6 -> 2.8...the linux croud delights in changing everything around.

      If you can convince the PHBs to release it under the GPL, then you don't have to spend time or money maintaining it. One of the kernel janitors will probably port it to new kernels.

    2. Re:It's pretty easy by Micah · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you can convince the PHBs to release it under the GPL, then you don't have to spend time or money maintaining it. One of the kernel janitors will probably port it to new kernels.

      Maybe, but I hope you don't give hardware companies those kinds of ideas.

      A hardware company really should, ideally, maintain the drivers for their own products AND work with the kernel janitors or maintainers to keep an up to date copy in the Linux kernel sources.

      The kernel guys do great with most of the drivers they write, but it seems like it's best for the hardware company to do it 1) out of courtesy, to prevent others from having to maintain drivers that make the company money, and 2) for quality control -- the community might not know how to get the most out of the device.

  5. Hmm by GigsVT · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Well, from reading the source of a couple drivers, it looks like most are one or two person deals.

    3ware, for example, is a company that provides open source drivers that have been accepted into the linus tree. They seem to be primarily written and maintained by Adam Radford alone.

    There's also a userspace component to manage raids, would your devices also need userspace apps developed to make them useful? That's one question you have to ask.

    Anyway, good job. It's always good to see devices with open source drivers that don't suck. (Make sure yours don't :)

    --
    I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  6. Driver complexity is the tricky point by tzanger · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Take a look at many of the USB serial drivers; tiny drivers, very clean. The USB storage drivers, same thing (assed-up hardware is the reason for complexity in those drivers).

    Writing a device driver for Linux is no more difficult than writing a device driver for Win32. You're in Ring 0 (for ia32) for both, so a poor driver can cause the system to come down. My suggestion would be to take a look at what you've written for win32, estimate how much of that you can keep, and write the linux kernel abstraction layer code.

    If you've written the driver correctly it shouldn't be a very large task at all, I would imagine.

    1. Re:Driver complexity is the tricky point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This was not an insightful comment. Win32 drivers are a lot more complicated. In Linux, there isn't much to implementing the file operations block, and going from there. In Windows, managing those IRPs and power management requests is a lot trickier. The NT kernel API gets tricky, and learning about the IRQLs and all of the NT kernel features is really hard. Plus, you don't get kernel source. It's a real pain in the ass. If I were given the assignment of writing a Linux driver vs a Windows driver, I'd take the Linux driver -anyday-. It's infinitely easier.

  7. Easiest way to create/maintain a driver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The easiest way to get a Linux driver would be to give find an interested developer, give them a free device and detailed documentation, and answer any questions they have. If you're working on a tight budget, this might be the best option.

    There are lots of people who attempt to write a driver for a device, but fail only because the manufacturer won't give them information. IMHO, this doesn't make much sense - if someone wants to help you out for free, why would you stop them?

  8. New platforms come at a fraction of the cost. by aminorex · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You don't want the drivers in distros -- you want them in
    Linus' kernel. Don't worry about liason with distro vendors.
    Worry about liason with vger.

    Since understanding the device, finding its quirks, and
    designing protocol is the overwhelming bulk of the work
    of writing a device driver, a reasonable rule of thumb is
    that adding another platform will entail an additional
    10-20% in manpower. Since the gap between a WinXP
    driver and a Linux driver is relatively large, the high-end
    of the scale is a closer approximation: Take the
    development time for the Windows driver and divide by 5.

    Now for maintenance, the new platform cost is much higher,
    because each platform has its quirks, etc. You do get to
    amortize some stuff over the platforms (no need to
    diagnose protocol bugs twice, etc.), but it doesn't count
    for a whole lot, so I would estimate that adding a new
    platform will entail 80-90% again as much in maintenance
    costs.

    However, for an open source driver, you will quickly find
    (if your hardware is at all useful) that the chore of forward-
    porting maintenance as the kernel develops will be largely
    assumed by the user community, so give any open-source
    platform a -25% maintenance cost tick, at least.

    Customer support issues are an entirely different ballgame,
    and depend so much on your audience that I won't venture
    even a guess -- keep in mind that customer support for
    a smaller community typically is less work than is a similar
    level of support for a larger community -- and Linux
    users are accoustomed to self-support and community-support.

    win_cost = win_dev + win_maint + win_support
    lin_cost = lin_dev + lin_maint + lin_support
    lin_dev = win_dev * 0.2
    lin_maint = win_maint * 0.6
    lin_support = win_support * k

    Fill in k.

    --
    -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
    1. Re:New platforms come at a fraction of the cost. by spitzak · · Score: 3, Interesting
      If you release it GPL (or any other open-source compatable license) and your first version works at all (it does not crash & it manages to communicate enough signals that at least a light blinks & it contains enough partially-working code to "document" the device) then I would estimate the maintenence costs by multiplying them by zero. The driver would be immediately added to the Linux source and debugged and improved by users of your device. You would probably also make a bunch of sales instantly.

      The only downside is that legally you cannot take fixes made by those outside users and put them into your closed-source drivers. However it is highly likely that you can ask the authors of the changes for permission to use the code, one way to convince them is to say that doing that is the only way for their code to get into the "official linux driver" that can be downloaded from your web page.

    2. Re:New platforms come at a fraction of the cost. by sigxcpu · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You should also cinsider the fact, that debugging device drivers under Linux, is much easier then under windows, because you have the source of the OS, and if you suspect that there is a bug, you can add your debug code wherever you want and test it. (sometimes much faster then reading the code and trying to find it - something you can't do in windoze anywhay.)

      One company I worked for even developed a linux deriver, it had no intention of officialy releasing, (It was just one part of a bigger device) just to get the ability to debug the the hardware efficiantly.

      (Yes I am a linux kernel programmer.)

      Besides, if your devieces are usefull, the Linux comunity has an intrest in having them work under linux.
      If your device is something of common use, say an IDE controller or a NIC, you would find people willing to help you, or even write the driver for you, if you provid the full documantation and a working sample. (and if you give them a peek at the sources of your working windows driver it will probably be a very simple job. )
      If you are willing to supply these then the right place to ask is on the LKML.

      --
      As of Postgres v6.2, time travel is no longer supported.
    3. Re:New platforms come at a fraction of the cost. by TephX · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The only downside is that legally you cannot take fixes made by those outside users and put them into your closed-source drivers. However it is highly likely that you can ask the authors of the changes for permission to use the code, one way to convince them is to say that doing that is the only way for their code to get into the "official linux driver" that can be downloaded from your web page.

      Or just release your Windows drivers under the GPL. I mean, if you're releasing GPL Linux drivers anyway, then you're clearly not protecting any proprietary interface information or whatnot, and drivers are hardly an item on which you can make a profit by selling them anyway, so it really seems like you don't lose anything at all by GPLing the Windows drivers too.

      Yeah, this is "not the way it's done" and the managers won't agree to it. My point isn't necessarily that this is realistic, but that the people opposed to it are just being stupid.

      --
      I metamoderate all Redundant and Offtopic moderations as Unfair.
  9. WinDriver by Twylite · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm not a driver developer, but I've had to look into the possibility of cross-platform USB (and other) drivers before. Do yourself a favour and take a look at WinDriver (no, I have nothing whatsoever to do with the company or the product).

    The initial cost can be a bit steep, but the ROI could well be worth it. The suite allows you to write a USB driver that is source-compatible over Win98/Me/2K/XP/2003, Linux 2.0/2.2/2.4, and WinNT, for USB 1.1/2.0 and UHCI, OHCI, or EHCI.

    --
    i-name =twylite [http://public.xdi.org/=twylite], see idcommons.net
    1. Re:WinDriver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe, but what kind of performance cost are you facing? And how are any 3rd parties meant to maintain the driver then?

  10. definitely a 1 or 2, no higher by itzdandy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I have done some driver work, build and debuging and linux is a driver writers dream compared to windows. I would estimate that a linux driver will consume about 50% as much time as a windows drive writing either from scratch. I reality, you may have a lot or reusable code from the windows drivers so you could be looking at less. Also do take the advice of other posts and get the basic driver out ASAP, and allow the OS community help out on the rest.

  11. Same difficulty as Windows by ni4882 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    For the most part, writing a linux device driver is pretty much the same difficulty as writing a Windows device driver. The real question is, do you really want to make your driver GPL compliant? See, you'll be giving up some pretty important IP that you may not want to give up. Now somebody else could come along and make a device that behaves exactly like your company's device, just because you gave away interesting tidbits about how your hardware works. Initially you may gain some acceptance and increased revenue for doing this, but in the long run it may end up sabatoging the product you're trying to support. I know I'm probably gonna get flamed to high hell for this, but I'm personally not the biggest fan of the GPL. You may want to contact your HW engineers and lawyers before you dive to deep into doing this. They may have a much different take than you on supporting linux.
    So technically speaking, writing a driver is going to be the same difficulty as far as programming, but much more complicated as far as the business decision involved.

  12. how about OS X? by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Does your company support OS X as well? Just remember that Mac customers tend to have the extra discretionary income to purchase all sorts of Firewire and USB goodies... Be a sport and advocate for a multi-polar OS environment, Win32, OS X, and Linux... I relinquish control of the soapbox...

    --
    "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
  13. Professional experience by gibson_81 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I was hired to do something similar; first, port existing ISA drivers from VxWorks to Linux, then port again from ISA to PCI ...

    The time it takes to port the drivers in itself isn't very much - I spent one and a half year in that company, but that was because that's how long it took them to get the hardware for the PCI device I was supposed to drive working. The actual driver, for working and tested hardware, should be a couple of weeks for one coder, full-time.

    When it comes to complexity, that varies a lot. Since I suppose you've been working on the drivers for Windows, you already know most of the hardware stuff, so yuo won't find it very difficult. Also, the kernel has a number of support functions for PCI (probably for USB too, but I'm not sure on that) which allows you to speak to the device in a fairly "high-level" language. Usually, you just call pci_register_device with your vendor and device ID's, and then you get a pci_device struct for each device the kernel can find. I assume something similar exists for USB.

    I'd recommend getting an O'Reilly book on device drivers, and looking in the PCI and USB subsystems in the kernel; that should be enough. So, to rate the difficulty, I'd say a '1', since much of the code can be shared between the drivers (you could even create both drivers from the same source, with a "kernel mapping library" to interface with Windows/Linux) and since, as many others have already said, the hard part about writing a device driver is to figure out how the hardware is working.

    Oh, and you'll definately want to enable "Magic SysRq" on your development box, 'cause every single mistake your driver makes can cause an OOPS (my favourite was when I accidentially storde the driver name in an auto variable, so every time I tried to unload the driver, I got an OOPS *S*)

  14. Pretty Straightforward by AstroTech · · Score: 2, Informative

    I have written several device drivers for both Windoze and Linux. In my opinion, the Linux drivers were far more straightforward to write and maintain. As long as I could get _complete_ information for the hardware, I would choose to work on a Linux driver over a Windows driver if I were given the choice.