Here’s an interesting one, a developer from NVIDIA noted on the Linux Kernel Mailing List that NVIDIA has been designing some new open source drivers. So I did some digging and got an interesting response.
Here’s what they said that originally caught my attention (source, thanks Luke!):
I got curious, so I popped the NVIDIA developer who said that an email asking if they would mind clarifying it a bit, so they did and they allowed me to share their reply:
This could be something very interesting, but it sounds like it’s still a long ways off right now. It’s interesting to note that NVIDIA are working behind the scenes on more open drivers for Linux, which can only be a good thing for our future. Open drivers are one major reason I keep seeing people switching over to AMD, so perhaps in future with the work from this NVIDIA developer (and others they mentioned) things may change for the better.
They may even go the amdgpu route, where part of it is open and part closed. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Here’s what they said that originally caught my attention (source, thanks Luke!):
Quote[...] when designing some recent new (open-source, yay!) device drivers[...]
I got curious, so I popped the NVIDIA developer who said that an email asking if they would mind clarifying it a bit, so they did and they allowed me to share their reply:
QuoteHi Liam,
Here, I was referring to the UVM (Unified [Virtual] Memory) device driver. That shows up as nvidia-uvm.ko, which in turn depends on another driver (currently nvidia.ko) to handle GPU setup. UVM does page faulting, DMA via our GPU's copy engines (DMA units), and generally figures out what pages belong where.
UVM is about 66,000 lines, it's all open source (MIT licensed, right now), and you can find it by running `NVIDIA*.run -x` and looking at the extracted source code.
Future: naturally, it would be interesting to be able to drop in something else (Nouveau?? Tegra? other?) to optionally take the place of nvidia.ko. However, that may or may not happen--there are a lot of things going on, and despite being in the middle of it all, I still cannot yet predict exactly what module layout we'll end up with in, say, a few years. The interface between nvidia.ko and nvidia-uvm.ko is much messier than I'd like, and it will take some engineering time to clean it up--that's good to do in any case...but I'm digressing.
As for what I think you really care about: there are other open source initiatives in NVIDIA. I and others are actively working on them, but unfortunately, we don't quite have a publicly announceable thing yet.
This could be something very interesting, but it sounds like it’s still a long ways off right now. It’s interesting to note that NVIDIA are working behind the scenes on more open drivers for Linux, which can only be a good thing for our future. Open drivers are one major reason I keep seeing people switching over to AMD, so perhaps in future with the work from this NVIDIA developer (and others they mentioned) things may change for the better.
They may even go the amdgpu route, where part of it is open and part closed. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
All posts need to follow our rules. For users logged in: please hit the Report Flag icon on any post that breaks the rules or contains illegal / harmful content. Guest readers can email us for any issues.
I'm not entirely sure why they can't just open-source all their drivers? How are they making money or whatever by not open-sourcing them?
0 Likes
I'm not entirely sure why they can't just open-source all their drivers? How are they making money or whatever by not open-sourcing them?
They might have patents implementations that they have to work around (because they have integrated them under NDA) and specific optimizations for games, basically loads of secret sauces they don't want to open yet...
Last edited by Emazza on 16 Mar 2017 at 11:41 pm UTC
4 Likes, Who?
Looks like pressure from AMD starts affecting them at last. Good development!
No idea about Nvidia's specifics, but in general, open sourcing a huge codebase that used to be closed isn't an easy process. Which is demonstrated by AMD trying to open up their current Vulkan and OpenCL implementations.
Firstly, some things can be copyrighted by others and not by the company which is trying to open it up. They'd need to replace those if they can't make original owners open it (usually too hard). Then, they need to be ready to increase risk of patent trolling attacks, since once the code is open, trolls can jump on it, and claim they violate some garbage software patent XYZ. Some even explicitly said, they aren't opening their GPU drivers because of that:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPjSm_98rgo&t=3m20s
Last edited by Shmerl on 17 Mar 2017 at 12:12 am UTC
I'm not entirely sure why they can't just open-source all their drivers?
No idea about Nvidia's specifics, but in general, open sourcing a huge codebase that used to be closed isn't an easy process. Which is demonstrated by AMD trying to open up their current Vulkan and OpenCL implementations.
Firstly, some things can be copyrighted by others and not by the company which is trying to open it up. They'd need to replace those if they can't make original owners open it (usually too hard). Then, they need to be ready to increase risk of patent trolling attacks, since once the code is open, trolls can jump on it, and claim they violate some garbage software patent XYZ. Some even explicitly said, they aren't opening their GPU drivers because of that:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPjSm_98rgo&t=3m20s
Last edited by Shmerl on 17 Mar 2017 at 12:12 am UTC
9 Likes, Who?
slaapliedje 17 Mar 2017
Not to mention, there is potential for code from some other companies in there. Or (as previously mentioned) some things that were added into the drivers long ago that the copyright holders won't re-license. I'm sure even some 3DFx code lives on there, since nVidia bought them oh so long ago.
(on an semi-related note, I've been playing around with my Atari STs, and every time I mention nVidia, I think of NVDI... )
(on an semi-related note, I've been playing around with my Atari STs, and every time I mention nVidia, I think of NVDI... )
0 Likes
Good to hear. I think they will have to start opening things if they want to remain in the lead, otherwise AMD will slowly take over.
2 Likes, Who?
I'll be highly skeptical of this, however. Nvidia just doesn't seem like they're really that open to me. Just look at G-Sync, there's nothing stopping Nvidia from adopting Freesync, rather than trying to sell their overpriced G-Sync tech.
5 Likes, Who?
ElectricPrism 17 Mar 2017
If Nvidia wants to compete to win me back - open source drivers are the only possibility.
I must have spent about $1,500 on GPUs in the last couple years GTX 290, GTX 460, GTX 650, GTX 750 Ti SC, GTX 970 SSC x 2, RX 480.
Nvidia is going to take a lot of action before I consider them a viable alternative and competitive.
MESA 17 on Polaris is pretty damn good, they're late to the party and behind track.
So @nvidia - you wan't my money? Come get it out of my wallet - get the work done on a fully open source driver and make it outperform AMD in gaming on Linux - that is what it will take to get me and my 15 Linux Workstations back to the green side.
Make no such action and all our Steam Boxes will definitely be AMD. No tricks, just a straight up fact about the future.
(Oh, and also I refuse to ever own another nVidia Laptop until/unless the driver is open source and performs well, I'm looking forward to Polaris APU - I hear it's gonna kick-ass and not only that it'll cost less in laptop form so that's nice too).
Last edited by ElectricPrism on 17 Mar 2017 at 3:34 am UTC
I must have spent about $1,500 on GPUs in the last couple years GTX 290, GTX 460, GTX 650, GTX 750 Ti SC, GTX 970 SSC x 2, RX 480.
Nvidia is going to take a lot of action before I consider them a viable alternative and competitive.
MESA 17 on Polaris is pretty damn good, they're late to the party and behind track.
So @nvidia - you wan't my money? Come get it out of my wallet - get the work done on a fully open source driver and make it outperform AMD in gaming on Linux - that is what it will take to get me and my 15 Linux Workstations back to the green side.
Make no such action and all our Steam Boxes will definitely be AMD. No tricks, just a straight up fact about the future.
(Oh, and also I refuse to ever own another nVidia Laptop until/unless the driver is open source and performs well, I'm looking forward to Polaris APU - I hear it's gonna kick-ass and not only that it'll cost less in laptop form so that's nice too).
Last edited by ElectricPrism on 17 Mar 2017 at 3:34 am UTC
4 Likes, Who?
RussianNeuroMancer 17 Mar 2017
I'll believe it when I see it.
4 Likes, Who?
TheRiddick 17 Mar 2017
Just look at G-Sync,
To be fare the new Freesync2 is closed loop just like g-sync also. I don't know if AMD will be able to sell freesync2 with the way they intend to do it (exclusive product selection among other things).
2 Likes, Who?
I'll be highly skeptical of this, however. Nvidia just doesn't seem like they're really that open to me. Just look at G-Sync, there's nothing stopping Nvidia from adopting Freesync, rather than trying to sell their overpriced G-Sync tech.
So far NVidia only went (partly) open-source when they were pressured
by boundary conditions, in particular their bigger customers.
See Tegra for example.
They simply don't have a track record that hints they are a (F)OSS-friendly company.
I'd welcome it, if that changes.
Yet I highly doubt it.
Last edited by sub on 17 Mar 2017 at 9:01 am UTC
2 Likes, Who?
I don't see anything to be hyped about. They didn't even suggest the core gpu driver would get ever opened. This is just a memory handling part. I don't think they even think about having a fully open stack. Their mindset seems to be a very secretive, "mine mine mine!" approach. Just look at what they do with GSync, GameWorks, basically everything. Closed and heavily optimized towards their company, not towards universal industry standards. The polar opposite of AMD. And as long as their approach pays them well, why should they change? Most customers quite clearly like their practices.
3 Likes, Who?
I'm sorry that NVidia does not open source their driver, given that for gaming they are the far best ones.
I've read a while ago that 95% of the driver code was shared between Linux and Windows which would explain why they do not open source them. However it is a small step in the right direction.
I've read a while ago that 95% of the driver code was shared between Linux and Windows which would explain why they do not open source them. However it is a small step in the right direction.
0 Likes
tuxintuxedo 17 Mar 2017
I am also quite skeptical on this. Usually when Nvidia talks about open drivers, they just mean their Tegra, nothing else. Hard to believe they would change their minds on the GPU side, if they can't even ship their closed firmwares in time for the open driver to get basic functionality. As far as I remember, not long ago there was a case when they promised to ship it and they ended up months later with it. And these were just some closed source files.
2 Likes, Who?
Pompesdesky 17 Mar 2017
Just look at G-Sync,
To be fare the new Freesync2 is closed loop just like g-sync also. I don't know if AMD will be able to sell freesync2 with the way they intend to do it (exclusive product selection among other things).
In which way is FreeSync 2 closed ? What I understand is that AMD has only made some more stringent rules to follow in order to improve the quality of the rendering (some monitors had sub par quality because the rules were too broad with the initial FreeSync implementation). However it is still royalty-free and free to use.
1 Likes, Who?
My major complaint about NVidia is not about not opening their existing blob.
This is difficult for various reasons mentioned - also for AMD (and others).
My complaint is that they widely refuse to provide documentation of their ASICs,
which in turn massively slows down development of open drivers.
Apart from that, they seem to be general hostile towards open standards when they
try hard to push their proprietary stuff to create a vendor lock-in.
Take their OpenCL support compared to CUDA.
It's nothing but a real shame.
They definitely not belong among the "good guys".
I take them as those bullying pricks at the schoolyard that you better stay away.
This is difficult for various reasons mentioned - also for AMD (and others).
My complaint is that they widely refuse to provide documentation of their ASICs,
which in turn massively slows down development of open drivers.
Apart from that, they seem to be general hostile towards open standards when they
try hard to push their proprietary stuff to create a vendor lock-in.
Take their OpenCL support compared to CUDA.
It's nothing but a real shame.
They definitely not belong among the "good guys".
I take them as those bullying pricks at the schoolyard that you better stay away.
3 Likes, Who?
But at least freesync is a standard. A standard on HDMI 2 and on DP1.2 . And yes, it might be that it's not as good as G-Sync, but the point is that it is easy to implement on all monitors.Just look at G-Sync,
To be fare the new Freesync2 is closed loop just like g-sync also. I don't know if AMD will be able to sell freesync2 with the way they intend to do it (exclusive product selection among other things).
0 Likes
I have a simple guide: I look at the amount of continuous effort a company has put into maintaining their or generic stuff in the linux kernel. The top is: intel (generic and intel specific), amd (I haven't looked closely but I assume mostly ati and amd specific, although they try to make things generic), samsung (generic and samsung specific). redhat is not a harware company, although it really is one of the top investors.
Nvidia is simply not among those. Ok, they are better than Qualcomm (not hard though), but even broadcom >> Nvidia in maintenance and support.
These are just kernel support. If we are going to shift focus to generic opensource userspace software, I think Samsung will even top Intel. And in generic opensource we have a new player called Valve...
This guide means multiple things to me: if I buy a samsung phone I will never feel cheated, even if the software sucks, because in a way I will be investing in my own company.
Same goes for intel and amd. I've stopped buying nvidia due to their anti-competitive gameplay: they do not compete on technology, they only try to lock developers and users in.
But since Valve means a lot to linux I did buy an expensive steam machine without any regret (which of course only has nvidia inside).
And most of the games on steam... I don't mind if they are bad because a % goes to valve that invests in opensource, which I use to profit from. Capitalism as it was meant to be.
Nvidia is simply not among those. Ok, they are better than Qualcomm (not hard though), but even broadcom >> Nvidia in maintenance and support.
These are just kernel support. If we are going to shift focus to generic opensource userspace software, I think Samsung will even top Intel. And in generic opensource we have a new player called Valve...
This guide means multiple things to me: if I buy a samsung phone I will never feel cheated, even if the software sucks, because in a way I will be investing in my own company.
Same goes for intel and amd. I've stopped buying nvidia due to their anti-competitive gameplay: they do not compete on technology, they only try to lock developers and users in.
But since Valve means a lot to linux I did buy an expensive steam machine without any regret (which of course only has nvidia inside).
And most of the games on steam... I don't mind if they are bad because a % goes to valve that invests in opensource, which I use to profit from. Capitalism as it was meant to be.
2 Likes, Who?
That's very interesting, but won't help a lot short-term for the open drivers.
I'm sticking with AMD now anyway. The pace they're at improving the mesa drivers is great. Yea, true, mostly for newer cards, but that's actually even true for entry-level cards as my RX460.
It's sad though that some games still don't run. Thinking on grand ages medieval in example ... loved that game.
Last edited by STiAT on 17 Mar 2017 at 10:48 am UTC
I'm sticking with AMD now anyway. The pace they're at improving the mesa drivers is great. Yea, true, mostly for newer cards, but that's actually even true for entry-level cards as my RX460.
It's sad though that some games still don't run. Thinking on grand ages medieval in example ... loved that game.
Last edited by STiAT on 17 Mar 2017 at 10:48 am UTC
1 Likes, Who?
I'd be happy with well-supported and full functioning proprietary drivers.
I have an Optimus laptop and use theirs proprietary drives, everything works and well except the Optimus part. I still have to use Bumblebee...
I was discussing the Optimus topic on their forums.
I have an Optimus laptop and use theirs proprietary drives, everything works and well except the Optimus part. I still have to use Bumblebee...
I was discussing the Optimus topic on their forums.
0 Likes
I will remain skeptical, but if it does happen then I can only say: cheers!
2 Likes, Who?
Patreon
PayPal
How to install GE-Proton on Steam Deck, SteamOS, Linux
An idiots guide to setting up Minecraft on Steam Deck / SteamOS with controller support
See more from me