4 ms·

Nvidia refuses to work with upstream properly, so that's not surprising. Once they'll stop fooling around and will get behind Nouveau, things might improve. Tho

by shmerl 6y ago

Nvidia refuses to work with upstream properly, so that's not surprising. Once they'll stop fooling around and will get behind Nouveau, things might improve. Though I'm fine using AMD for my gaming needs on Linux.

izacus 6y ago
So basically the plan is to fuck over nVidia until they just give you all their code? Imagine if that behaviour would be done by Google, Microsoft or others - constantly breaking Mozillas or anyone elses code until they'd change their software license.
- shmerl 6y ago
  I'd say the plan is to mostly ignore them on Linux until they become completely irrelevant or will become a good citizen and upstream their driver. I'm OK with Nvidia fading on Linux into irrelevance with their blob - good riddance. If they don't care about doing things on Linux properly, Linux users and developers don't need to care about Nvidia. That's been the case for Linux users for quite a while already. Only those who are stuck with CUDA lock-in need to deal with this mess these days. Nouveau developers expressed all this best: > Moral of the story... just get an Intel or AMD board and move on with life. NVIDIA has no interest in supporting open-source, and so if you want to support open-source, pick a company that aligns with this. https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/linux-graphics-x-org-drivers/open-source-nvidia-linux-nouveau/998310-nouveau-persevered-in-2017-for-open-source-nvidia-but-2018-could-be-much-better#post998316 https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/linux-graphics-x-org-d...
  - franga2000 6y ago
    > I'm OK with Nvidia fading on Linux into irrelevance with their blob - good riddance. The vast majority of Linux use is on servers. When servers need GPUs it's usually for machine learning or other computation. Nvidia currently holds almost all of that market. All dropping Nvidia support would accomplish is forcing everyone in that market to switch to Windows. Cloud revenue would drop significantly for Linux companies like RedHat, which would in turn mean they have less spare money to work on desktop distros. So as much as I despise Nvidia, until AMD/RTG get their shit together AND (yes, we need both) Intel's dGPUs come out (and don't suck), we desperately need Nvidia support.
    - shmerl 6y ago
      I mentioned above that some are still stuck with CUDA, but for the most part I was talking about desktop Linux users who can for all practical purposes ignore Nvidia today. But in general I agree, the sickening CUDA lock-in situation has to change. AMD and Intel are working on it so things are improving, though slowly.
- baq 6y ago
  Yes, that’s the plan, not bad if you ask me. Nobody is forcing them to write Linux drivers after all. They can just stop doing that.
rleigh 6y ago
I understand the frustration to some degree. Part of me even agrees with it. However, what I don't see is that nVidia should have any obligation (ethical, legal or otherwise) of any sort to provide a Linux driver at all. The demands of Linux developers and users alike seem particularly entitled. Linux is the only mainstream kernel, free or proprietary, which doesn't have a sane and supported driver interface. And while I can see some of the justifications for it, I think after nearly 20 years they are starting to wear a little thin. The way other out of tree subsystems, like ZFS, have been treated is appalling. Deliberately using the GPL as a cudgel to beat other projects into submission is just plain nasty, and to treat other open source projects this way is spiteful and unnecessary.
- shmerl 6y ago
  No obligation, yes. Nvidia are messing things up for Nouveau and don't upstream their own driver. So Linux users don't have any obligation to use Nvidia either ;) I'd say good riddance, AMD and Intel are doing a good job. Also, imagine Linux didn't enforce GPL. Would Nvidia be more motivated to upstream their driver? Not in the least. They don't care about GPL. What they want is to have a leverage over the market and charge more for industrial usage, by forcing usage of the blob on their terms (which upstreamed driver would prevent by giving ability to use the hardware to anyone on any terms). That's their whole motivation in this as far as I understand.
- jcranmer 6y ago
  > Linux is the only mainstream kernel, free or proprietary, which doesn't have a sane and supported driver interface. I don't believe OpenBSD or FreeBSD has such an interface either, and I'd classify those as mainstream kernels. > However, what I don't see is that nVidia should have any obligation (ethical, legal or otherwise) of any sort to provide a Linux driver at all. Well, they don't. But they have a commercial need for Linux support: their recent revenue growth has been in datacenter usage of GPUs, and Linux support is necessary for that computing environment. To that end, IMHO NVidia is the entity that needs to align its development practices to support the existing Linux driver community rather than Linux needing to align its process to accommodate NVidia's wishes. This isn't to say that Linux has been right in its treatment of other external entities: the treatment of ZFS, as you note, does seem to be driven more by spite than actual technical reasons. But in the case of NVidia, there is definitely a good deal of fault on NVidia's side that needs to be acknowledged.

by shmerl 6y ago

izacus 6y ago

So basically the plan is to fuck over nVidia until they just give you all their code? Imagine if that behaviour would be done by Google, Microsoft or others - constantly breaking Mozillas or anyone elses code until they'd change their software license.

shmerl 6y ago
I'd say the plan is to mostly ignore them on Linux until they become completely irrelevant or will become a good citizen and upstream their driver. I'm OK with Nvidia fading on Linux into irrelevance with their blob - good riddance. If they don't care about doing things on Linux properly, Linux users and developers don't need to care about Nvidia. That's been the case for Linux users for quite a while already. Only those who are stuck with CUDA lock-in need to deal with this mess these days. Nouveau developers expressed all this best: > Moral of the story... just get an Intel or AMD board and move on with life. NVIDIA has no interest in supporting open-source, and so if you want to support open-source, pick a company that aligns with this. https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/linux-graphics-x-org-drivers/open-source-nvidia-linux-nouveau/998310-nouveau-persevered-in-2017-for-open-source-nvidia-but-2018-could-be-much-better#post998316 https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/linux-graphics-x-org-d...
- franga2000 6y ago
  > I'm OK with Nvidia fading on Linux into irrelevance with their blob - good riddance. The vast majority of Linux use is on servers. When servers need GPUs it's usually for machine learning or other computation. Nvidia currently holds almost all of that market. All dropping Nvidia support would accomplish is forcing everyone in that market to switch to Windows. Cloud revenue would drop significantly for Linux companies like RedHat, which would in turn mean they have less spare money to work on desktop distros. So as much as I despise Nvidia, until AMD/RTG get their shit together AND (yes, we need both) Intel's dGPUs come out (and don't suck), we desperately need Nvidia support.
  - shmerl 6y ago
    I mentioned above that some are still stuck with CUDA, but for the most part I was talking about desktop Linux users who can for all practical purposes ignore Nvidia today. But in general I agree, the sickening CUDA lock-in situation has to change. AMD and Intel are working on it so things are improving, though slowly.
baq 6y ago
Yes, that’s the plan, not bad if you ask me. Nobody is forcing them to write Linux drivers after all. They can just stop doing that.

rleigh 6y ago

I understand the frustration to some degree. Part of me even agrees with it. However, what I don't see is that nVidia should have any obligation (ethical, legal or otherwise) of any sort to provide a Linux driver at all. The demands of Linux developers and users alike seem particularly entitled. Linux is the only mainstream kernel, free or proprietary, which doesn't have a sane and supported driver interface. And while I can see some of the justifications for it, I think after nearly 20 years they are starting to wear a little thin. The way other out of tree subsystems, like ZFS, have been treated is appalling. Deliberately using the GPL as a cudgel to beat other projects into submission is just plain nasty, and to treat other open source projects this way is spiteful and unnecessary.

shmerl 6y ago
No obligation, yes. Nvidia are messing things up for Nouveau and don't upstream their own driver. So Linux users don't have any obligation to use Nvidia either ;) I'd say good riddance, AMD and Intel are doing a good job. Also, imagine Linux didn't enforce GPL. Would Nvidia be more motivated to upstream their driver? Not in the least. They don't care about GPL. What they want is to have a leverage over the market and charge more for industrial usage, by forcing usage of the blob on their terms (which upstreamed driver would prevent by giving ability to use the hardware to anyone on any terms). That's their whole motivation in this as far as I understand.
jcranmer 6y ago
> Linux is the only mainstream kernel, free or proprietary, which doesn't have a sane and supported driver interface. I don't believe OpenBSD or FreeBSD has such an interface either, and I'd classify those as mainstream kernels. > However, what I don't see is that nVidia should have any obligation (ethical, legal or otherwise) of any sort to provide a Linux driver at all. Well, they don't. But they have a commercial need for Linux support: their recent revenue growth has been in datacenter usage of GPUs, and Linux support is necessary for that computing environment. To that end, IMHO NVidia is the entity that needs to align its development practices to support the existing Linux driver community rather than Linux needing to align its process to accommodate NVidia's wishes. This isn't to say that Linux has been right in its treatment of other external entities: the treatment of ZFS, as you note, does seem to be driven more by spite than actual technical reasons. But in the case of NVidia, there is definitely a good deal of fault on NVidia's side that needs to be acknowledged.