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

Fairphone suggests Qualcomm is the biggest barrier to long-term Android support

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 226 posts

Re: Fairphone suggests Qualcomm is the biggest barrier to long-term Android support

#181

Post by kevincox »

yokaze wrote: post #6
kogir wrote: post #5

Qualcomm is only able to obstruct in this way because Linux doesn’t keep the kernel driver ABI stable for any fixed period of time. If Android used FreeBSD and Qualcomm shipped drivers for the latest build when the SoC was released, you’d have up to five years of support from that kernel release. Windows Phone 10 was actually in a position to support phones for years and even got Qualcomm onboard. It’s a shame the pl…

Two things: 1. There are longterm kernel releases, with up to 10 years support, and Android uses those exactly to avoid major support issues ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system)#Lin... ). 2. That doesn't fix the issue that Qualcomm themselves do not want to release documentation and only want to support their hardware for up to two years. Ergo, you would run some outdated binary blob.

Exactly, having the hardware work is one thing. But to support a phone you need to fix security issues. So every binary blob is a ticking time bomb that is just waiting for a security vulnerability to be found either in it, or that needs a firmware patch to solve or workaround.

So either you need the source so that you can support it yourself, or you need a contract with Qualcomm to release security patches.

Sure, a stable ABI may mean that it would be cheaper for Qualcomm to release version updates as well, but at this point I would be happy if I could get security updates for more than 3 years. We can start asking for feature updates next.

Re: Fairphone suggests Qualcomm is the biggest barrier to long-term Android support

#182

Post by ntauthority »

dathinab wrote: post #15

It's not just Qualcomm it's closed source driver blobs in general. Even if your CPU might still be supported your other hardware might not. A common offender is camera drivers as far as I know and while you sometimes can still make the camera work it often comes with noticeable decreased quality (as the special patent encumbered closed source image post processing sausage is missing). Besides that potential but as fa…

Meanwhile, on a platform with a generally stable binary driver ABI alike Windows, even drivers for a prototype MSM8960 phone (Snapdragon S4) released in 2012-2013 will still run on 2021 versions of ARM32 Windows (insofar as these are still being built and released, of course).

Re: Fairphone suggests Qualcomm is the biggest barrier to long-term Android support

#183

Post by kevincox »

kogir wrote: post #21
kogir wrote: post #5

Qualcomm is only able to obstruct in this way because Linux doesn’t keep the kernel driver ABI stable for any fixed period of time. If Android used FreeBSD and Qualcomm shipped drivers for the latest build when the SoC was released, you’d have up to five years of support from that kernel release. Windows Phone 10 was actually in a position to support phones for years and even got Qualcomm onboard. It’s a shame the pl…

I’m going to reply to a few sibling comments at once: Yes, they could upstream drivers, but they won’t. It’s not in their best interest. I’m taking about what could be done in spite of this. Given that they won’t upstream drivers, if the blobs they release keep working for the reasonable life of your device, your phone can get other software updates, including major OS updates. I don’t expect or need the camera or ra…

> I don’t expect or need the camera or radio driver to change across various android versions. The hardware is the same!

You probably don't. But a serious security vulnerability could be discovered that lets apps get root. So yes, it likely is fine, but I want a promise from my manufacturer that I will be able to keep using my phone for 5-10 years. I want to take the guaranteed lifetime into account when I am buying a phone.

Ideally it would be legally binding such that I can get a refund if they don't uphold it.

Re: Fairphone suggests Qualcomm is the biggest barrier to long-term Android support

#184

Post by kevincox »

someperson wrote: post #90
swiley wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer is a monolithic GPL kernel that forces manufactures to publish driver source code but they don't want to admit it.

Or a Windows-style stable ABI with drivers remaining closed-source. That's what Google are doing with their new Fuchsia OS and Zircon kernel, which is expected to replace the GPL-licensed Linux kernel on Android and ChromeOS devices. Basically their moving away from the copyleft Linux kernel. Given Google's awful track record with Android and security updates, and their lack of ability to force companies like Qualcom…

This will allow the same blobs to keep working but won't get those blobs essential security updates.

This isn't a technical problem, it is an economic (and social and legal) problem.

Re: Fairphone suggests Qualcomm is the biggest barrier to long-term Android support

#185

Post by Joeri »

toast0 wrote: post #36
kogir wrote: post #5

Qualcomm is only able to obstruct in this way because Linux doesn’t keep the kernel driver ABI stable for any fixed period of time. If Android used FreeBSD and Qualcomm shipped drivers for the latest build when the SoC was released, you’d have up to five years of support from that kernel release. Windows Phone 10 was actually in a position to support phones for years and even got Qualcomm onboard. It’s a shame the pl…

> Windows Phone 10 was actually in a position to support phones for years and even got Qualcomm onboard. It’s a shame the platform was never competitive, and they’d burned all their goodwill on the 7 and 8 fiascos. Regardless of how much goodwill they burned with 7 and 8, their handling of the WM 10 release nailed the coffin shut. They actually made a release that ran ok, but it was 18 months after the initial releas…

Yes, exactly that. I got onto windows phone with 8.0 and it was very nice to use even if app support was lacking. I steadily saw it decline. 8.1 took away much of what made it unique in the hope of getting better app support (narrator: it didn’t) but still remained fast and stable. Windows phone 10 was an outright disaster, slow and buggy, with no advantage to the user.

Maybe microsoft was always doomed in the mobile space because of app support, but they did a lot of things wrong that sealed the deal.

Re: Fairphone suggests Qualcomm is the biggest barrier to long-term Android support

#186

Post by kevincox »

ac29 wrote: post #173
grumpyprole wrote: post #158

Three years of support is very poor and encourages e-waste, I will not be buying a phone with Qualcomm hardware in it.

That rules out iPhone as well, then.

It seems like Apple is being enough that they can get updates for their blobs, or are writing their own blobs. Although even then there are no promises. Maybe if a critical vulnerability was found in a Qualcomm blob Apple wouldn't be able to patch it. So in practice they do very well despite containing Qualcomm parts, but it isn't clear how much of this is just luck.

Re: Fairphone suggests Qualcomm is the biggest barrier to long-term Android support

#187

Post by jasonjayr »

londons_explore wrote: post #155
klodolph wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that a number of Android vendors operate by just taking a version of the Linux kernel and making any changes they need. By the time the phone is released and anyone cares, it's an old version of the Linux kernel, and the changes weren't written in a way that it's easy to incorporate them in the first place. The idea of incorporating a large chunk of changes all at once at the end is nobody's idea…

The SoC manufacturer provides to the OEM exactly one kernel version that works on that chip. The OEM has to use that version. Oftentimes the SoC manufacturer will deliberately make it an old version because they know that the next android release will require a newer kernel version, therefore forcing the OEM to update to a new and more profitable SoC rather than continuing to sell an old model.

Isn't that a blatant GPL Violation?

Also; has any work been done on decompiling that kernel and trying to match up the symbols with existing source code?

Re: Fairphone suggests Qualcomm is the biggest barrier to long-term Android support

#188

Post by someperson »

kevincox wrote: post #184
someperson wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or a Windows-style stable ABI with drivers remaining closed-source. That's what Google are doing with their new Fuchsia OS and Zircon kernel, which is expected to replace the GPL-licensed Linux kernel on Android and ChromeOS devices. Basically their moving away from the copyleft Linux kernel. Given Google's awful track record with Android and security updates, and their lack of ability to force companies like Qualcom…

This will allow the same blobs to keep working but won't get those blobs essential security updates. This isn't a technical problem, it is an economic (and social and legal) problem.

Well it is a technical problem: it can be solved by reverse engineering and re-implementing every driver.

But yes, it's an economic problem because that's pretty expensive (but has been achieved before eg, nouveau driver)

Google could easily use their monopolistic position to force all SoC vendors to provide greater software support.

Heck, Google could even simply pay every SoC vendors to open source their drivers. It's unlikely to even cost that much.

But today's Google is simply too incompetent to ever fix Android's security update problem. They've been making silly excuses for decades.

Re: Fairphone suggests Qualcomm is the biggest barrier to long-term Android support

#189

Post by my123 »

jasonjayr wrote: post #187
londons_explore wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The SoC manufacturer provides to the OEM exactly one kernel version that works on that chip. The OEM has to use that version. Oftentimes the SoC manufacturer will deliberately make it an old version because they know that the next android release will require a newer kernel version, therefore forcing the OEM to update to a new and more profitable SoC rather than continuing to sell an old model.

Isn't that a blatant GPL Violation? Also; has any work been done on decompiling that kernel and trying to match up the symbols with existing source code?

The full source code of that kernel version is provided, including all KM drivers.

Re: Fairphone suggests Qualcomm is the biggest barrier to long-term Android support

#190

Post by bildung »

ntauthority wrote: post #182
dathinab wrote: post #15

It's not just Qualcomm it's closed source driver blobs in general. Even if your CPU might still be supported your other hardware might not. A common offender is camera drivers as far as I know and while you sometimes can still make the camera work it often comes with noticeable decreased quality (as the special patent encumbered closed source image post processing sausage is missing). Besides that potential but as fa…

Meanwhile, on a platform with a generally stable binary driver ABI alike Windows, even drivers for a prototype MSM8960 phone (Snapdragon S4) released in 2012-2013 will still run on 2021 versions of ARM32 Windows (insofar as these are still being built and released, of course).

ABIs are only needed because some manufacturers insist on closed source blobs. Why should Linux, a project whose entire raison d'etre is to provide an open source kernel, make life easier for companies unwilling to accept that?
Post reply on HN