Intel certified drivers

Posted Jul 22, 2005 0:29 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (guest, #1954)
In reply to: The hardware vendors' panel by iabervon
Parent article: Kernel Summit 2005: The hardware vendors' panel

What I don't get is why does an Intel customer need Intel to certify a device driver, but none of the rest of the system? In the kernel alone, more than half the code that has to work right for the customer to successfully exploit the Intel product is not part of the driver in question. Who certifies the rest of Linux? It's always been my impression that using Linux and getting performance guarantees are dichotomous.

So I agree that what a company in Intel's position should do is simply design to and test with a particular entire system configuration (driver, kernel, middleware, applications, ...) and advertise those particular test results and leave the customer to do what he always does with Linux -- try to stick close to that configuration, and assume the risk of breakage.

to post comments

Intel certified drivers

Posted Jul 22, 2005 10:08 UTC (Fri) by farnz (subscriber, #17727) [Link]

PHB syndrome kicks in; their Dell laptop is an Intel Centrino laptop, which implies that Intel makes most of the hardware in it. Everyone knows that hardware is much more important than software, since it's so easy to copy software, yet very hard to copy hardware. Therefore, only device drivers matter, since the rest of the kernel doesn't do anything with the hardware.

You and I know that this is a completely wrong assessment of the situation, but it's how PHBs are prone to thinking.