6 ms·

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 r

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.

gigatexal 10y ago
That's how the kernel development works. As far as I can tell, if you get maintainer status from Linus you can do as you please for the understanding is that you're acting as he would.
- chx 10y ago
  As Dave said: > Given the choice between maintaining Linus' trust that I won't merge 100,000 lines of abstracted HAL code and merging 100,000 lines of abstracted HAL code I'll give you one guess where my loyalties lie. He is acting in a way he thinks would keep Linus' trust. Also, usually the maintainers have far superior technical knowledge of their areas to Linus. I mean, Linus is just one guy and each maintainer have their own specialty.
wyldfire 10y ago
Linus delegates authority to people he trusts. And in this case, Dave is likely representing well what Linus would do. > near-totalitarian level of power. I don't think you meant to use that word. Linus and the kernel contributors together own the copyrights on the kernel. It's not totalitarian for them to dictate its future. It's their creative work. It's downright egalitarian that they let you use the kernel however you like, provided that you give the source in turn to whoever you hand it to.
- ocdtrekkie 10y ago
  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 about the way Linux works.
  - wmf 10y ago
    It's amazing that one guy with little financial interest in the results or effects can make that call for everyone. Impartial expert judges are usually considered a good thing. Note that Dave Airlie is not acting on a whim here; the Linux development community has discussed HALs for probably 20 years and has come to the conclusion that they are a net negative. For better or worse, the Linux development process does not care about democracy or market share or vendor relations. It's a somewhat unusual way to build software, but the result pretty much speaks for itself.
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      Yep, each vendor that doesn't want to deal with it, just forks it, never contributing anything back.
  - Analemma_ 10y ago
    If it was a big secret that this was how Linux worked and it took the companies by surprise, I could see how this could be a bad thing, but it never has been: Linus has always been very upfront that he is Benevolent Dictator for Life and always has the last word. Don't get onboard if you don't like that system.
    - wolfgke 10y ago
      Then all the Linux fans that complained to AMD that they don't deliver open source drivers should from now on better shitstorm the kernel maintainers, since AMD delivered.
      - jlgaddis 10y ago
        There is absolutely nothing preventing AMD from delivering their own open-source drivers to their customers. They want it in kernel, however, and that means they have to play by the in kernel rules.
      - prodigal_erik 10y ago
        AMD didn't deliver a Linux driver. They delivered a Windows driver plus a bunch of glue code that nobody really wants. In the best of all possible worlds, somebody would dissect the Windows driver for instruction and write a proper Linux driver and nobody would try to run the Windows driver as-is.
forgottenpass 10y ago
That's some near-totalitarian level of power. AMD is perfectly within their rights and abilities to ship an out-of-tree driver. As I understand it, DKMS exists to make that use case easier for end users. The popular consumer-facing distros would probably make it easy as dirt to install too. The difference between that and upstreaming into the kernel is primarily shifting some of the the maintenance burden onto the kernel developers. That comes with the condition of adding stakeholders to the driver design, not just using them as a code dumping ground. "Totalitarian" seems a bit over the top.
fapjacks 10y ago
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.
- this-dang-guy 10y ago
  I'd prefer to see NVidia style drivers, personally. I don't give a rat's beans if optimized video card, nic, etc drivers are open. I just want a system that will work properly without them. Not 60FPS on Ultra settings in <game> work, I mean boot and function as a normal user's desktop.
  - fapjacks 10y ago
    Yeah, I don't care about nvidia drivers, either. AMD doesn't need this in the kernel anymore than nvidia does (and they don't). Kernel modules work just fine for drivers. I don't want some convoluted shit crammed into mainline because <company> chooses to ignore feedback about their code. I am perfectly fine with this one guy shooting down AMD's pretentious attitude here. If it weren't for those kernel devs, good luck getting a Linux system to "boot and function as a normal user's desktop" because of all the crap that would be in there. Like systemd, just piles of crap in a confused, kitchen-sink orgy.
    - digi_owl 10y ago
      I have come to fear that we will eventually need GPU drivers in the kernel directly, thanks to more and more of the graphics code out there assuming DRM/DRI etc.
- pjmlp 10y ago
  Being a free beer clone of expensive UNIX workstation OSes helped. Of course companies had an agenda to improve it to the point they wouldn't need to keep paying Sun, SGI, HP, IBM, Compaq, Unisys,...
matt4077 10y ago
Why don't you try to get some code merged into the Windows kernel and tell us how that goes? > After reading the arguments, I'm kind of on AMD's side. And that's why stuff like this doesn't get put to a vote.
k_sze 10y ago
There's a reason Linus is called the BDFL of Linux.

gigatexal 10y ago

That's how the kernel development works. As far as I can tell, if you get maintainer status from Linus you can do as you please for the understanding is that you're acting as he would.

chx 10y ago
As Dave said: > Given the choice between maintaining Linus' trust that I won't merge 100,000 lines of abstracted HAL code and merging 100,000 lines of abstracted HAL code I'll give you one guess where my loyalties lie. He is acting in a way he thinks would keep Linus' trust. Also, usually the maintainers have far superior technical knowledge of their areas to Linus. I mean, Linus is just one guy and each maintainer have their own specialty.

wyldfire 10y ago

Linus delegates authority to people he trusts. And in this case, Dave is likely representing well what Linus would do. > near-totalitarian level of power. I don't think you meant to use that word. Linus and the kernel contributors together own the copyrights on the kernel. It's not totalitarian for them to dictate its future. It's their creative work. It's downright egalitarian that they let you use the kernel however you like, provided that you give the source in turn to whoever you hand it to.

ocdtrekkie 10y ago
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 about the way Linux works.
- wmf 10y ago
  It's amazing that one guy with little financial interest in the results or effects can make that call for everyone. Impartial expert judges are usually considered a good thing. Note that Dave Airlie is not acting on a whim here; the Linux development community has discussed HALs for probably 20 years and has come to the conclusion that they are a net negative. For better or worse, the Linux development process does not care about democracy or market share or vendor relations. It's a somewhat unusual way to build software, but the result pretty much speaks for itself.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    Yep, each vendor that doesn't want to deal with it, just forks it, never contributing anything back.
- Analemma_ 10y ago
  If it was a big secret that this was how Linux worked and it took the companies by surprise, I could see how this could be a bad thing, but it never has been: Linus has always been very upfront that he is Benevolent Dictator for Life and always has the last word. Don't get onboard if you don't like that system.
  - wolfgke 10y ago
    Then all the Linux fans that complained to AMD that they don't deliver open source drivers should from now on better shitstorm the kernel maintainers, since AMD delivered.
    - jlgaddis 10y ago
      There is absolutely nothing preventing AMD from delivering their own open-source drivers to their customers. They want it in kernel, however, and that means they have to play by the in kernel rules.
    - prodigal_erik 10y ago
      AMD didn't deliver a Linux driver. They delivered a Windows driver plus a bunch of glue code that nobody really wants. In the best of all possible worlds, somebody would dissect the Windows driver for instruction and write a proper Linux driver and nobody would try to run the Windows driver as-is.

forgottenpass 10y ago

That's some near-totalitarian level of power. AMD is perfectly within their rights and abilities to ship an out-of-tree driver. As I understand it, DKMS exists to make that use case easier for end users. The popular consumer-facing distros would probably make it easy as dirt to install too. The difference between that and upstreaming into the kernel is primarily shifting some of the the maintenance burden onto the kernel developers. That comes with the condition of adding stakeholders to the driver design, not just using them as a code dumping ground. "Totalitarian" seems a bit over the top.

fapjacks 10y ago

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.

this-dang-guy 10y ago
I'd prefer to see NVidia style drivers, personally. I don't give a rat's beans if optimized video card, nic, etc drivers are open. I just want a system that will work properly without them. Not 60FPS on Ultra settings in <game> work, I mean boot and function as a normal user's desktop.
- fapjacks 10y ago
  Yeah, I don't care about nvidia drivers, either. AMD doesn't need this in the kernel anymore than nvidia does (and they don't). Kernel modules work just fine for drivers. I don't want some convoluted shit crammed into mainline because <company> chooses to ignore feedback about their code. I am perfectly fine with this one guy shooting down AMD's pretentious attitude here. If it weren't for those kernel devs, good luck getting a Linux system to "boot and function as a normal user's desktop" because of all the crap that would be in there. Like systemd, just piles of crap in a confused, kitchen-sink orgy.
  - digi_owl 10y ago
    I have come to fear that we will eventually need GPU drivers in the kernel directly, thanks to more and more of the graphics code out there assuming DRM/DRI etc.
pjmlp 10y ago
Being a free beer clone of expensive UNIX workstation OSes helped. Of course companies had an agenda to improve it to the point they wouldn't need to keep paying Sun, SGI, HP, IBM, Compaq, Unisys,...

matt4077 10y ago

Why don't you try to get some code merged into the Windows kernel and tell us how that goes? > After reading the arguments, I'm kind of on AMD's side. And that's why stuff like this doesn't get put to a vote.

k_sze 10y ago

There's a reason Linus is called the BDFL of Linux.