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

Arm reportedly changing licensing model to prohibit custom GPUs and TPUs

9to5google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 36 posts

Re: Arm reportedly changing licensing model to prohibit custom GPUs and TPUs

#11

Post by ErikCorry »

Conan_Kudo wrote: post #8

This change would potentially lead to ARM licensees switching from integrated SoC models to more conventional split architecture designs where the CPU, GPU, and other significant processors are split into separate dies to maintain flexibility. The main problem with this is going to be on mobile phones, where board space is at a steep premium. Other form factors that typically have multiple processors will probably be…

For ARM to force their customers to avoid SoC designs would be a huge issue, not just in phones.

I can't imagine what ARM are thinking. It's been a competitive advantage over Intel for over a decade that SoC was easy to do with ARM, while it was almost impossible with x86, because of the way IP is managed in the x86 world.

Re: Arm reportedly changing licensing model to prohibit custom GPUs and TPUs

#13

Post by colechristensen »

Dracophoenix wrote: post #10
colechristensen wrote: post #5

Wasn’t this whole thing a somewhat sketchy attempt by Qualcomm to change its licensing terms by acquiring a company with a different business model and therefore different Arm license? Seems like Arm is trying to close licensing loopholes.

I doubt that there's any credible claim to the acquisition of a license from an acquired company being a loophole. If it was, it wasn't something ARM paid attention to for 20+ years. ARM didn't have a problem with Compaq/DEC transferring its StrongARM IP to Intel. Nor did ARM have a problem with Intel selling off part of the XScale line to Marvell. Even if Nuvia merely sold its architectural license in place of being…

It comes down to specific legal language of the various licenses, not an analysis of what Arm did in the past. The claim is credible enough that the court didn't dismiss it out of hand. Armchair analysis without the actual licenses and some legal knowledge aren't all that helpful.

The lawsuit states

"Nuvia's licensing fees and royalty rates reflected the anticipated scope and nature of Nuvia's use of the Arm architecture. The licenses safeguarded Arm's rights and expectations by prohibiting assignment without Arm's consent, regardless of whether a contemplated assignee had its own Arm licenses."

So Arm's case seems to hinge on whether or not the license language covering the prevention of assignment will be held up in court as applicable to this situation. That's the kind of legal dispute which will be very technical and not easy to speculate about... definitions of individual words and intent and all of that.

Re: Arm reportedly changing licensing model to prohibit custom GPUs and TPUs

#15

Post by Dracophoenix »

colechristensen wrote: post #13
Dracophoenix wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt that there's any credible claim to the acquisition of a license from an acquired company being a loophole. If it was, it wasn't something ARM paid attention to for 20+ years. ARM didn't have a problem with Compaq/DEC transferring its StrongARM IP to Intel. Nor did ARM have a problem with Intel selling off part of the XScale line to Marvell. Even if Nuvia merely sold its architectural license in place of being…

It comes down to specific legal language of the various licenses, not an analysis of what Arm did in the past. The claim is credible enough that the court didn't dismiss it out of hand. Armchair analysis without the actual licenses and some legal knowledge aren't all that helpful. The lawsuit states "Nuvia's licensing fees and royalty rates reflected the anticipated scope and nature of Nuvia's use of the Arm architec…

> Armchair analysis without the actual licenses and some legal knowledge aren't all that helpful.

I didn't claim that ARM lacked a case. My point was that acquiring another company's license is not in and of itself a "loophole", a word I find to be heavily abused. As you mentioned, the language of the particular licenses will dictate the outcome of this case. But as ARM has not as yet made those terms clear to the public, the most one can do is look at past behaviors and rule out certain arguments. My evaluation may change as more information becomes available.

And given the circumstances, ARMChair analysis is entirely appropriate.

Re: Arm reportedly changing licensing model to prohibit custom GPUs and TPUs

#16

Post by Conan_Kudo »

ErikCorry wrote: post #11
Conan_Kudo wrote: post #8

This change would potentially lead to ARM licensees switching from integrated SoC models to more conventional split architecture designs where the CPU, GPU, and other significant processors are split into separate dies to maintain flexibility. The main problem with this is going to be on mobile phones, where board space is at a steep premium. Other form factors that typically have multiple processors will probably be…

For ARM to force their customers to avoid SoC designs would be a huge issue, not just in phones. I can't imagine what ARM are thinking. It's been a competitive advantage over Intel for over a decade that SoC was easy to do with ARM, while it was almost impossible with x86, because of the way IP is managed in the x86 world.

I can imagine what Arm is thinking: "we want higher margin customers".

You think that "competitive advantage" helped them any? It certainly didn't. They really want the PC and datacenter space. Apple has proven that alternative architectures aren't dead there, and Arm wants it.

Me personally? I hope this works. The ARM ecosystem as it stands today is horribly broken and promotes e-waste to an extreme degree. I am also under no delusions that RISC-V would be better at this.

Re: Arm reportedly changing licensing model to prohibit custom GPUs and TPUs

#17

Post by yunohn »

Conan_Kudo wrote: post #8

This change would potentially lead to ARM licensees switching from integrated SoC models to more conventional split architecture designs where the CPU, GPU, and other significant processors are split into separate dies to maintain flexibility. The main problem with this is going to be on mobile phones, where board space is at a steep premium. Other form factors that typically have multiple processors will probably be…

Why would this prevent SoCs?

Re: Arm reportedly changing licensing model to prohibit custom GPUs and TPUs

#18

Post by snvzz »

Conan_Kudo wrote: post #16
ErikCorry wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For ARM to force their customers to avoid SoC designs would be a huge issue, not just in phones. I can't imagine what ARM are thinking. It's been a competitive advantage over Intel for over a decade that SoC was easy to do with ARM, while it was almost impossible with x86, because of the way IP is managed in the x86 world.

I can imagine what Arm is thinking: "we want higher margin customers". You think that "competitive advantage" helped them any? It certainly didn't. They really want the PC and datacenter space. Apple has proven that alternative architectures aren't dead there, and Arm wants it. Me personally? I hope this works. The ARM ecosystem as it stands today is horribly broken and promotes e-waste to an extreme degree. I am als…

>I am also under no delusions that RISC-V would be better at this.

RISC-V is already way better at this.

e.g.:

The early boot process (SBI) was standardized years ago, and widely deployed in current hardware.

Late boot process (UEFI on RISC-V) was standarized early this year, ahead of relevant hardware (servers, laptops, workstations).

ISA Profiles standard 2022 is in public review right now, and will likely be effective before the year ends. Hardware where this is relevant (e.g. SoC used in VisionFive2) already released this year is already compliant with the draft.

Future hardware will be widely compliant. Linux distributions and other operating systems target these profiles.

Relative to the utter chaos ARM has when it comes to these important topics, RISC-V is way ahead, being well prepared before the hardware floods the world.

Re: Arm reportedly changing licensing model to prohibit custom GPUs and TPUs

#19

Post by snvzz »

yunohn wrote: post #17
Conan_Kudo wrote: post #8

This change would potentially lead to ARM licensees switching from integrated SoC models to more conventional split architecture designs where the CPU, GPU, and other significant processors are split into separate dies to maintain flexibility. The main problem with this is going to be on mobile phones, where board space is at a steep premium. Other form factors that typically have multiple processors will probably be…

Why would this prevent SoCs?

It will not.

The industry will simply speed up RISC-V adoption.

Re: Arm reportedly changing licensing model to prohibit custom GPUs and TPUs

#20

Post by snvzz »

KVFinn wrote: post #14

Isn't this basically the nightmare scenario that everyone feared about the NVIDIA acquisition?

Not really. The NVIDIA acquisition would be done already.

This is happening way later, with an industry that's already chosen to and taken steps to migrate to RISC-V, and thus is much better prepared to cope.

Post reply on HN