Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AMD responds to Linux kernel maintainer's rejection of AMDGPU patch

lists.freedesktop.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 284 posts

Re: AMD responds to Linux kernel maintainer's rejection of AMDGPU patch

#31

Post by izacus »

I think this is a great situation to quote Linus on Linux supporters inside companies (not 100% same, but I think related):

(on litigation against companies that contribute)

> Anyone in the company that pushed to use Linux is now seen as "wrong" and instantly is pissed off that external people just messed up their employment future.

> - Anyone in the company that resisted the use of Linux (possibly in ways that caused the code not to be released over the objection of the previously mentioned people) are vindicated in their opinion of those "hippy"[2] programmers who develop Linux.

...

> Now, even if, after many years of work on your part, you do get that code, what is the end result? You have made an enemy for life from the people who brought Linux into the company, you have pissed off the people who didn't like Linux in the first place as they were right and yet you "defeated" them. Both of those groups of people will now work together to never use Linux again as they don't want to go through that hell again, no matter what.

(source and context: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/ksummit-discuss/... )

...

I think this is the worst part of this SNAFU - Dave has just proven every naysayer in AMD right that Linux is not worth supporting. He cut away feet from the team that has supported and fought for an equivalent opensource driver support on Linux which would be released in lockstep with Windows releases. He has also proven right everyone on nVidia which has talked against opensourcing their drivers and keeping them as a horrendous binary blob. He has also pissed off his greatest ally inside AMD.

All with a single "no". Not "We can't accept this, let's talk about how to make us both happy". With that he gave new ammunition to every manager at every large hardware corporation that's fighting against opensourcing their drivers and made every Linux supporting team lead in such corporation less likely to push opensource world forward. It seems we're stuck in shitty Android kernel forks with shitty GPU binary blobs in near future, with only Windows as a proper contender for good 3D performance.

EDIT: To be clear, I'm not blaming Dave for refusing the patch for tech cases. I AM blaming him for refusing it so flatly and not actively working more with AMD to get the situation fixed. This is not a minor thing - having stable AMD drivers in kernel would really push Linux desktop forward, make sure Linux is compatible with several Macs among other machines and put pressure on nVidia to opensource theirs. But you don't get there by belittling contributors and cultivating "us vs. them" mentality.

Re: AMD responds to Linux kernel maintainer's rejection of AMDGPU patch

#32

Post by wyldfire »

izacus wrote: post #25
zznneezznnee wrote: post #11

The kernel maintainers don't necessarily want your code. Additional shit in mainline increases the maintenance burden. If the code isn't putting upstream maintainability above all else in its implementation, then it's generally not getting merged unless someone wasn't paying attention or some other forces compelled an exception. Alex's first reply reads like he's willfully ignoring that aspect of the NACK. It's not a…

Then again, we're not talking about some wierd network card driver here. We're talking about having a constant up-to-date driver on par with Windows for a major GPU card manufacturer. A driver which has caused a large amount of desktop users to return to Windows due to its historical issues. While I get the reasoning for rejection, the typical OSS rejection attitude is also problematic. I kinda don't see a dialog hap…

> A driver which has caused a large amount of desktop users to return to Windows due to its historical issues.

Who's to say its replacement will be any better? If the hygiene isn't there, maybe the quality isn't either.

Re: AMD responds to Linux kernel maintainer's rejection of AMDGPU patch

#33

Post by fapjacks »

imaginenore wrote: post #3

What I don't get is how one kernel maintainer can make such a massive decision that affects all of Linux. That's some near-totalitarian level of power. After reading the arguments, I'm kind of on AMD's side. I get what Dave wants, but it seems extremely idealistic.

The Good King is how Linux has come to run the world's servers. I am perfectly fine missing out on some incidental functionality here or there in order to keep this power structure which had protected the Linux kernel thus far. It seems to work extremely well.

Re: AMD responds to Linux kernel maintainer's rejection of AMDGPU patch

#34

Post by plorkyeran »

izacus wrote: post #31

I think this is a great situation to quote Linus on Linux supporters inside companies (not 100% same, but I think related): (on litigation against companies that contribute) > Anyone in the company that pushed to use Linux is now seen as "wrong" and instantly is pissed off that external people just messed up their employment future. > - Anyone in the company that resisted the use of Linux (possibly in ways that cause…

> Not "We can't accept this, let's talk about how to make us both happy".

He gave them that answer 6 months ago, and they ignored it. This was not an abrupt rejection out of nowhere.

Re: AMD responds to Linux kernel maintainer's rejection of AMDGPU patch

#35

Post by fapjacks »

zie wrote: post #20
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose the intended notion, would be given the number of Linux distributions and use cases out there, the number of companies involved, the number of products built on top of the Linux kernel... it's amazing that one guy with little financial interest in the results or effects can make that call for everyone. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing, to be honest, it's just... particularly interesting ab…

That's not true, really. Many vendors keep their own in-house patches to the mainline tree, that never make it upstream for various reasons(See Android's kernel for instance). There is nothing stopping a vendor or anyone else, from publishing their own linux tree that is a fork of mainline with this AMD patch applied. Linus maintains the 'mainline' tree, just because of the history and because most kernel hackers bel…

Right. And this is an indicator that the Good King and his generals have done an exemplary job keeping it solid: Everyone uses their product.

Re: AMD responds to Linux kernel maintainer's rejection of AMDGPU patch

#36

Post by akkartik »

On a tangent: what the fuck is up with the giant quotes at the top of these messages? They're technically fulfilling the letter of netiquette by not top-posting, but they serve absolutely no purpose.

If you aren't going to take the trouble to pull out short quotes to respond to, please just delete the message altogether. All our clients have excellent support for threading these days, and we can find the message you're responding to without needing it repeated in full every. single. time.

(This criticism also applies to the message this was responding to: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13136426)

Re: AMD responds to Linux kernel maintainer's rejection of AMDGPU patch

#37

Post by izacus »

plorkyeran wrote: post #34
izacus wrote: post #31

I think this is a great situation to quote Linus on Linux supporters inside companies (not 100% same, but I think related): (on litigation against companies that contribute) > Anyone in the company that pushed to use Linux is now seen as "wrong" and instantly is pissed off that external people just messed up their employment future. > - Anyone in the company that resisted the use of Linux (possibly in ways that cause…

> Not "We can't accept this, let's talk about how to make us both happy". He gave them that answer 6 months ago, and they ignored it. This was not an abrupt rejection out of nowhere.

The "answer" 6 months ago was "Yeah, you'll have to write a full Linux driver yourself and maintain it." type deal.

It was unreasonable then as it is now.

If I tell you "You need to rewrite your product in Brainfuck or I'll kick you out in 6 months.", the fact that I told you that doesn't make it any less insane.

Re: AMD responds to Linux kernel maintainer's rejection of AMDGPU patch

#38

Post by hubert123 »

I am not familiar at all with this stuff but honestly people should be working on a way to isolate external code in the kernel at runtime somehow. I wouldnt want to be in either position, I dont want to maintain somebody else's shitty code or get any kind of bugs for my own code from it but I also wouldnt want to be in AMDs position and adhere or rewrite some code that I'm absolutely fine with as it is. There is a lack of a project vision if people reject code that would otherwise lead to great "commercial" aka user adoption success. The maintainers are understandably reluctant to accept new code, especially if it doesnt even try to adhere to the coding standards. He even acknowledged the political situation but it wasnt even his job to care about that. There needs to be somebody over him who's job it is to make him accept that code or figure out a better solution.

Re: AMD responds to Linux kernel maintainer's rejection of AMDGPU patch

#39

Post by zznneezznnee »

izacus wrote: post #31

I think this is a great situation to quote Linus on Linux supporters inside companies (not 100% same, but I think related): (on litigation against companies that contribute) > Anyone in the company that pushed to use Linux is now seen as "wrong" and instantly is pissed off that external people just messed up their employment future. > - Anyone in the company that resisted the use of Linux (possibly in ways that cause…

This is nonsense, a NACK is nowhere near the table-flip you're portraying here.

Re: AMD responds to Linux kernel maintainer's rejection of AMDGPU patch

#40

Post by gumby »

I didn't see where Dave slagged AMD's culture, and I think everyone was very polite and detailed about why this doesn't fit.

I understand why AMD wants to have one code base, but the kernel needs to have one consistent code base and style and can't afford to do otherwise. There's nothing stopping AMD distributing the code, it just won't be upstreamed.

Post reply on HN