Nvidia releases open-source GPU kernel modules
181–190 of 415 posts
Re: Nvidia releases open-source GPU kernel modules
#182With this announcement, I'm now interested in trying out some Nvidia graphics cards on the Pi again. Nouveau had some issues, and the official drivers had no source available, so I couldn't hack them to work. With the source available... it could be possible! Of course, CUDA support may never happen there, at least not using open source code.
Its a bit too early now isn't it ? The driver is still very alpha, and doesn't support most display stuff.
Re: Nvidia releases open-source GPU kernel modules
#183It will probably end up like how AMD cards work. The closed source driver still exists but there will hopefully be a completely open source stack (Nouveau++?) For nvidia. This blog has more details about red hats plans for this driver. https://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2022/05/11/why-is-the-open-so...
I've never properly understood why the closed source AMD driver still exists. Is it substantially different from the open source one? Does it offer anything not included in the open source one?
* Proprietary shader compiler that can also be used for Vulkan
* Legacy OpenGL driver optimized for closed-source workstation apps
Re: Nvidia releases open-source GPU kernel modules
#184With this announcement, I'm now interested in trying out some Nvidia graphics cards on the Pi again. Nouveau had some issues, and the official drivers had no source available, so I couldn't hack them to work. With the source available... it could be possible! Of course, CUDA support may never happen there, at least not using open source code.
Its a bit too early now isn't it ? The driver is still very alpha, and doesn't support most display stuff.
Re: Nvidia releases open-source GPU kernel modules
#185Re: Nvidia releases open-source GPU kernel modules
#186Earlier quoted context omitted.
You quickly get into something similar the ship of theseus (or Trigger's broom) argument. You write some code that must link to a GPL library to functon; that code is now GPL because it's a derivative work of the library. You rewrite that library under an MIT license, so now your code can link to that and run. Is your original code still a derivative work?
Your original code is never a derivative work. You retain copyright to the code you wrote yourself, even if it's combined with GPL later. GPL even contains this interesting clause: > You are not required to accept this License, since you have not signed it. So to answer your question: no, unless you've copied bits of GPL library into your code (or similar that would be judged as a copyright violation). There's also a…
Which might happen very easily: one #include and you might be there.
Re: Nvidia releases open-source GPU kernel modules
#1871) This is unambiguously Good News 2) This is not upstreamable in its current form (nvidia admit this in their press release) 3) In an ideal world, nouveau (the open source driver for nvidia hardware) would be able to target this kernel code. Right now though there's no commitment for any sort of stable userland ABI, and that makes that difficult (moving to a new driver version may break interfaces that nouveau uses)…
True, I remember though that the semi-recent AMD Radeon drop was not immediately merge-able to mainline because they used a bespoke hardware abstraction layer. But (as alluded to by your point #1) it's a huge first step, and in AMD's case I think they eventually reworked it so that it could indeed be merged.
Re: Nvidia releases open-source GPU kernel modules
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
You quickly get into something similar the ship of theseus (or Trigger's broom) argument. You write some code that must link to a GPL library to functon; that code is now GPL because it's a derivative work of the library. You rewrite that library under an MIT license, so now your code can link to that and run. Is your original code still a derivative work?
The license is abundantly clear about this and answers all your questions. It matters who is doing the rewriting and how they got the code in the first place.
The GPL is emphatically not clear about anything. It's a legal minefield precisely because no one has any idea what it means, and everyone has their own interpretation.
> It matters who is doing the rewriting and how they got the code in the first place.
Well, then,... that's about as clear as mud.
Re: Nvidia releases open-source GPU kernel modules
#18923 years ago in middle school I made my first ever linux user group post [1] trying to shift from an nvidia geforce to the onboard cyrix mediagx drivers because they had closed source drivers. It’s been a long time coming lol. [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/xf-xpert/msg04601.html
Haha that's awesome! I was 1 yo 23 years ago, but in the same vein, I had my middle school years of Linux. Although it was significantly simpler than what you were up to at the same age!
Re: Nvidia releases open-source GPU kernel modules
#190For those who didn't use Nvidia on linux in the old times: The driver was a proprietary binary. Since a kernel module requires interfacing with the kernel API, it could be considered a derivative work and a breach of the GPL license. So, Nvidia provided a small open source shim which interfaced between the kernel and the proprietary module. You had to compile that shim yourself with the right arcane command line inca…
That's basically still what happens. Fedora automates this nicely with akmods, which automatically rebuilds these source only modules and installs them when you update the kernel. Has been working smoothly for a while, but it is fundamentally the same thing still.