KS2007: Hardware support and the i386/x86_64 merger
The session started with a report from John Linville, the wireless networking stack maintainer. The now-famous reverse-engineered ath5k driver for Atheros chipsets is in progress, though it does not yet work reliably for all hardware. There are, he says, going to be some interesting developments with this software in the near future.
The only vendor who is putting any sort of development effort into free drivers is Intel, unfortunately. There are occasional process difficulties with Intel's developers, but as a whole, things are going reasonably well. One remaining big issue is regulatory compliance. Until the regulatory situation eases, a number of vendors will continue not to cooperate with the Linux community.
David Airlie talked about video drivers. The Nouveau project continues to work on a reverse-engineered driver for NVidia chipsets, but progress is very slow. Some chips can run glxgears, most cannot. There is a new memory management module which needs to get into the mainline before a number of tasks (texturing, in particular) can be addressed. On the other hand, 2D support is getting better than the current (free) nv driver, at least some of the time. There are, it seems, a vast number of per-card tweaks which must be applied, and those are still being discovered. The Nouveau driver is probably still a full year away from being usable.
On the ATI front, the Avivo effort has achieved decent 2D support, but no 3D so far. There is also some conversations happening with Via which could result, someday, in better support for those chipsets.
AMD manager Chris Schlaeger was then challenged to "give us some good news." According to Chris, Linux is very important to AMD; the company believes that the Opteron processor would not have been anywhere near as successful without Linux support. The company's future plans lead to an interesting problem, though. The "Fusion" product line will feature a central processor and a graphics processor on the same die. Continuing to support free software on the CPU while keeping the GPU closed leads to all sorts of contradictions; it's really not an option. So, to avoid losing Linux support altogether, AMD has made an important decision.
Starting with the R500 chipset and going forward, AMD will fully support free drivers for all of its graphics processors. This support will not take the form of a release of the current proprietary ATI driver; that code is not considered to be something that anybody would really want to look at. So there will be a clean start. AMD will release specifications and a skeleton driver with the plan to have 2D support working by the end of the year. The company is clearly hoping that the community will do much of the work on the driver, but it also plans to participate actively in the process. If AMD follows through - and there is no real reason to believe that it will not - then driver problems for AMD/ATI chipsets will soon be a distant memory.
Dirk then stood up to talk about the problems faced by companies which try to work with the community; this talk repeated much of the material from his LCE presentation. What was different was that, for this audience, Dirk asked the development community to push back harder against recalcitrant vendors. We might not want to ban binary-only modules altogether, but we should increase the amount of pain associated with maintaining those modules. It is time to actively make life hard for binary-only vendors.
A fear was expressed that such a policy might drive away vendors altogether. Dirk responded that, in the current market, walking away from Linux is no longer an option. Vendors have to work with Linux in one way or another. Another developer suggested that making things harder would mostly succeed in upsetting users. According to Dirk, that is part of creating pain for the vendors; upset users will eventually move to hardware which presents fewer problems. The amount of sympathy for this idea varied; some developers would rather work in making life easier for cooperative companies. The idea of making it easier to integrate drivers into the mainline was raised again.
In the final moments of this session, Bdale Garbee stated that, increasingly, HP is pushing its suppliers for components which are supported by free software. Intel, too, is doing that. According to Bdale, vendors need to hear one thing clearly: the days of selling closed hardware are coming to an end, soon. Such words were well received in this room, to say the least.
The next session covered a related topic: how the x86 architecture is to be supported in the future. In particular, the idea of merging the i386 and x86_64 architecture trees was on the agenda. Much of the discussion followed the lines of LWN's previous coverage of the topic, so it won't be repeated here.
It did take some time to cover that ground again, though, before Linus made
a pronouncement: the current 32-bit/64-bit split does not work, and he
intends to merge the patch joining the two architectures regardless of what
maintainer Andi Kleen thinks. Andi replied that this can certainly be
done, but that a new maintainer would have to be found for the combined
architecture; one hopes that he does not follow through with that statement. Almost everybody else was behind the idea, though, with the
PowerPC and S/390 developers talking about what a big win it had been for
them. So this merger would appear to be a done deal; the only open
question is whether it can be ready in time for the 2.6.24 merge window.
Index entries for this article | |
---|---|
Kernel | Device drivers |
Kernel | Nouveau |
Kernel | x86_64 |
Posted Sep 6, 2007 10:57 UTC (Thu)
by vblum (guest, #1151)
[Link] (6 responses)
Posted Sep 6, 2007 17:50 UTC (Thu)
by ckelso (guest, #43128)
[Link] (5 responses)
At the consumer level, embedded linux is already done in longstanding internal forks against 2.4. They _don't_ have anything to offer the vanilla 2.6 tree. The drivers that they do have are often incomplete or shoddy and aren't available at all to PC users. There is no reason to worry about whether you will chase them off, because they don't contribute even in the binary sense.
Posted Sep 6, 2007 21:00 UTC (Thu)
by AJWM (guest, #15888)
[Link]
Replacing a half-dozen fibre cards (HBAs) is cheap compared to what you're paying your SAN vendor, and if he says that card X isn't supported (by him) under the OS upgrade you want to do (or your DB vendor insists on) but card Y is, guess what's going to happen.
(And in this particular case the drivers for both X and Y cards were GPL, so that wasn't even a factor.)
Posted Sep 6, 2007 21:45 UTC (Thu)
by vblum (guest, #1151)
[Link]
I take it, though, that the graphics cards discussed here are intended for consumer / business desktop use? Very large businesses will probably not change their software setup, but change their hardware instead. Many people who have the choice, though, especially new users, will end up ditching the software that "didn't work" on their machine.
Posted Sep 6, 2007 22:06 UTC (Thu)
by amikins (guest, #451)
[Link] (2 responses)
Consumer marketshare is still rather fragile when you look beyond the hobbyists, and consumers tend to develop negative opinions pretty easily. For them, they almost certainly already HAVE another OS which 'just works' with their hardware.. The cost of learning Linux is then added to the cost of new hardware, assuming there is supported hardware that does what they need, and they can easily determine what is supported.
If 'winning' in that space is important, then this is an issue that warrants caution.
Posted Sep 6, 2007 23:51 UTC (Thu)
by ckelso (guest, #43128)
[Link] (1 responses)
Let's look about how hobbyists fair from a kernel perspective. I have never had an issue with a disk controller on desktop box. probably a total of about 10 different chipsets there. I haven't had sound driver issues since ALSA came about. I have had two systems that had XFree86 issues (not kernel per se, but without X I can't say that the kernel works for me either) and which were never solved by binary drivers anyway. I have had two systems that required third party, out-of-tree but still not binary, drivers for network.
Wireless has been and continues to be the biggest issue. The reason it is an issue isn't because of out-of-kernel or binary drivers. The reason it is an issue is because of software radio tuners. Open source software tuners are banned, you just can't make them. Worse yet, the big upgrade chip providers prefer the software tuners because the bulk of the market is a closed driver shop.
All in all though, the binary module issue is a red herring. The drivers that make up the bulk of the out-of-tree drivers available are simply enterprise. This is exactly where the developers have leverage. Why shouldn't they use it?
Posted Sep 7, 2007 0:13 UTC (Fri)
by amikins (guest, #451)
[Link]
I suspect there's little I can do to sway your opinion based on these statements, but I think it's worth noting that there's an increasing tendency for people to notice the sorts of things they're getting put through on their attempt to keep 'current' on their technology. People who are most definitely consumers -- not hobbyists by any stretch of the imagination -- are noticing that XP isn't coming on new computers anymore; Vista has started being noticed, and some people aren't liking it. This is causing regular people to start looking more and more at other options.
I've had several individuals who historically would have been the 'well, it works, so whatever' type ask me if I know anything about this 'Linux' thing, because they don't like Vista and want to know if they can get their work done on something aside from what Microsoft is pushing. There isn't significant marketshare CURRENTLY occupied by Linux for consumers.. But there's potential of it. The end-user class of software is pretty close to ready.
But there's a risk of a self-fulfilling prophecy. If something gets written off before it has a chance to happen, then that only ensures that it won't happen.
Posted Sep 7, 2007 9:26 UTC (Fri)
by modernjazz (guest, #4185)
[Link]
Posted Sep 11, 2007 23:49 UTC (Tue)
by MisterIO (guest, #36192)
[Link]
Hm. Upset users already have the hardware, typically for use over a period of years. Especially new users will quickly move to SOFTWARE which creates fewer problems. KS2007: Hardware support and the i386/x86_64 merger
Software can be a lot more expensive to change out, for a business, than hardware. This is what gives the developers leverage. A switch to windows (the only reasonable software change you could talk about when drivers are being discussed) is simply not viable for custom business code. If you needed to spend 100k to migrate an application or 4k in new hardware, what would you choose?KS2007: Hardware support and the i386/x86_64 merger
Yep, I've seen that in a couple of cases -- even in cases where it wasn't proven that the hardware/driver was the problem, just suspected. Rip out all the cards and replace them with something we know works (or the 3rd party application vendor supports, whatever). KS2007: Hardware support and the i386/x86_64 merger
Yes, for specialized application needs that is true.KS2007: Hardware support and the i386/x86_64 merger
This doesn't really acknowledge the consumer end, which is where things like binary video drivers generally come into play. Business isn't much of a volatile market for Linux at this time; the major players already know what's offered, and so adoption is pretty much just a matter of vendors getting their sales. KS2007: Hardware support and the i386/x86_64 merger
There are two markets for consumers as far as linux is concerned. Embedded devices (DVR, routers, network storage, etc...) and low end walmart PCs. Their is simply no demand outside of that. Consumers have _zero_ influence on vendors, sorry. They just don't care what runs on their systems, they only care that what the OS that came pre-installed works. Anyone that does care about running an after market OS is what you call a hobbyist.KS2007: Hardware support and the i386/x86_64 merger
>There are two markets for consumers as far as linux is concerned. Embedded devices (DVR, routers, network storage, etc...) and low end walmart PCs. Their is simply no demand outside of that. Consumers have _zero_ influence on vendors, sorry. They just don't care what runs on their systems, they only care that what the OS that came pre-installed works. Anyone that does care about running an after market OS is what you call a hobbyist.KS2007: Hardware support and the i386/x86_64 merger
Hooray about the AMD/ATI announcement! This is long hoped-for news.KS2007: Hardware support and the i386/x86_64 merger
Now the real big problem remains Nvidia.There are still no commercial games for Linux,but if Linux starts to give the possibility to create good 3d games ,then I don't know who will start(customers or software houses),but it's highly probable that we'll see a big jump on the Linux use.I hope that the AMD/ATI case will be the first big step in that direction.KS2007: Hardware support and the i386/x86_64 merger