NVIDIA Begins Releasing Documentation For Nouveau
sl4shd0rk writes "Nvidia, perhaps inspired by the infamous Torvalds Salute, has decided to do something about its crummy image with Open Source developers. The company has begun to release public documentation on certain aspects of its GPUs. Reactions from developers have been mixed; much of what's already been released wasn't a big mystery, but Nvidia says more is coming and they will also provide guidance in needed areas as well. Linus said, 'I'm cautiously optimistic that this is a real shift in how Nvidia perceives Linux. The actual docs released so far are fairly limited, and in themselves they wouldn't be a big thing, but if Nvidia really does follow up and start opening up more, that would certainly be great. They've already been much better in the ARM SoC space than they were on the more traditional GPU side, and I really hope that some day I can just apologize for ever giving them the finger.'"
Anyone else think this is a result of Valve's announcement of focus on Linux-based Steam?
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Since Intel, ARM, and Vivante have already spent their millions on delevoping the 3D graphics to compete with AMD, nvidia, and Immagination, nvidia might now feel it is ok to open source some of its specs.
Torvald's comments to Nvidia were to do with Optimus (their GPU switching stuff), not their closed graphics driver
I really hope that some day I can just apologize for ever giving them the finger.
There's no need to apologize later Linus. They behaved badly and you called them out on it. If they change their behavior for the better, simply praise them for that then.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Where might one find these tight ones?
Apologies to any sensitive women for encouraging this.
I thought that was part of the graphics driver, but I'm not familiar with the details.
"ABI" - Application Binary Interface. Linux has a stable ABI, he's ranted at noobs who broke the ABI before. "Application" being the operative word here... noticeably inapplicable to drivers and only tangentially related to HAL.
In other words: I'm sorry AC, I'm afraid I can't mean that.
I thought it was about Tegra, and Optimus, and GeForce, and maybe some bad memories of Nforce. NVIDIA has never before been a friend of open source.
Have a nice time.
Yes he's 12, but in the way that he says what's on his mind and doesn't cripple his communications with political correctness. Linus isn't about telling people "you're doing great!" when they're bad. He calls them out when the fail horribly and makes sure everyone knows about it.
What non-free component is the radeon driver dependent of? AFAIK, radeon is completely free. Even the FSF's approved distros use it, and Stallman is not known for his flexibility. Are you referring to S3TC? The driver is hardly "heavily dependent" on it.
I don't think the analogy holds too well.
That's cause you're holding it wrong. Here, you're supposed to hold that one like a joke:
*Ahem*
Q: "What kind of meat did the Priest have on Fridays?"
Forget it. NVIDIA's blob is frequently applauded for perfomance, but support for older cards is nonexistant. Geforce FXs and 6s don't even work with GTK3 DEs on either driver. Your best bets are replacing the video card, removing it altogether or using those old Mesa DRI drivers that don't use Gallium 3D. I'm sure they're still around.
Sort of. The userspace interface is the ABI that linux keeps constant. Basically all the syscalls, ioctls, and Linus even likes to include the nuances of how they operate as part of the ABI. This is the stuff that must not change, and it does a pretty good job at keeping it constant. Supposedly apps compiled to target the 1.0 kernel can still run just fine on the latest kernel, provided the libraries it links to also maintained good ABI stability.
The ABI breakage that occurs happens with in kernel functions themselves. These are things that are not considered standardized API functions or syscalls that should be accessed by userspace. But, in order to produce closed source drivers for Linux, companies like NVIDIA will need to link to these functions. Linking to these is of course a violation of the GPL, though, so NVIDIA gets around it by writing an open source shim that gets compiled when the driver is installed, which then connects to their more proprietary parts. One of the points of the GPL and allowed in kernel ABI breakage is to make it more difficult for people to keep their drivers closed source and outside the kernel.
Acting 12 is pretty good in a world of corporations yelling MINE MINE MINE while squabbling like 2 year olds.
Intel and AMD have their cpu architectures opened to the public, why not gpu architectures so the linux and bsd communities can develop better drivers for wayland and mir windowing systems, what are they hiding. Or at least Nvidia and AMD can build an opengl only gpu for the open source world(linux, bsd). Fucking corporations.
"ABI" - Application Binary Interface. Linux has a stable ABI
No, not for kernel modules it doesn't and that's obviously what we are talking about here. The lack of a stable ABI for kernel modules is also the reason why version information is stored in modinfo and a kernel module only loaded if it matches the running kernel.
"Application" being the operative word here... noticeably inapplicable to drivers and only tangentially related to HAL.
You're taking that too literally, this document may help you gain a better understanding of this subject.
Or like seagulls from Finding Nemo movie.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Guessing this
http://people.freedesktop.org/~agd5f/radeon_ucode/
The license says "free to redistribute in binary form" but its not open source and the license specifically forbids reverse engineering.
Nintendo should give up on making console hardware and stick with handhelds and offer their traditional console titles via Steam.
I'm not advocating for it, just pointing out that the idea that Linux has a stable ABI (in the context of kernel modules) is completely bogus.
Pick them a very special apology SHA1 hash.
A couple of days ago there was the Slashdot article about Linus being asked if he has been ever asked to insert a backdoor into Linux. Now as the full talk is available in YouTube , you might want to check the particular comment at 24:15 and judge for yourself. After his nodding and audience laughter, a few seconds after that Linus writes it off by shaking his head and saying "no", in a voice that to me sounds like it really was just meant to be only a joke. Any comments?
I thought that was part of the graphics driver, but I'm not familiar with the details.
Support for Optimus was later added to the Nvidia closed source Linux graphics driver (May 3, 2013 / 319.17).
(*uncontrollable giggling*)
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
news at 11
That page talks about the driver model, not the ABI.
Wrong, it talks about both.
Linux has a stable ABI, but not a stable driver model. Two completely different things.
Wrong again, the two most certainly are related. Since you either didn't read the link or couldn't comprehend it i'll quote a relevant passage from it:
The Linux driver model is different. For users, the goal is to provide the “Just Works” experience. The Linux model is that IHVs get the source code for their driver accepted into the mainline kernel. This entails a public peer review process to ensure that the driver code is of sufficient quality and does not have obvious bugs or security risks.3 Linux has neither a stable binary driver ABI nor a stable source-code driver Application Programming Interface (API). That is, there is no guarantee that an interface provided in one version of the kernel will be available in the next version, and portions of the ABI and API change in every kernel release.