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.
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 Mar 17, 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 Mar 17, 2017
Quoting: TheRiddickQuoting: AimelaJust 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?
Quoting: TheRiddickBut 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.Quoting: AimelaJust 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 March 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 March 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
See more from me