On multi-platform drivers
Posted Sep 9, 2011 20:12 UTC (Fri) by utoddl
Parent article: On multi-platform drivers
This is an overreaction and misinterpretation. Why should "architectural alignment" necessarily mean iron-fisted control of the code? Rather, it offers a hope that by the time new hardware makes its way to retail shelves people running modern kernels will find that it Just Works out of the box. It also could mean that issues found and fixed by those krazy Linux kids may improve the vendor's overall product line, thus rewarding financially a company who's willing to make the effort to play by our rules.
"Architectural alignment" does not suggest to me that Broadcom would be less than accepting of changes that make make their Linux driver or support better. They've obviously been graciously taking suggestions from established kernel devs for the last year in the way we would hope. I see no reason to expect less from them in the future. They've spent the effort to learn how to work "with" vs. "in spite of" the Linux Way. Good on 'em.
Turn the argument around: Why would a vendor and hardware manufacturer be in any worse position to maintain -- in coordination with a highly competent kernel development community -- drivers for current and future hardware that they understand fully than a handful of developers working in their spare time with incomplete specs and spurious bug reports?
This looks to me like a company trying hard to provide exactly the kind of support that others have been criticized for not providing for years. Kudos to Broadcom. This may be the ideal model for companies to work with the community; time will tell. I'm willing to give it a chance before declaring it an untenable approach.
to post comments)