5 ms·

Arm reportedly changing licensing model to prohibit custom GPUs and TPUs

50 points by sanatgersappa 4y ago

_hypx 4y ago
That seems like an incredibly dumb decision. They do realize that RISC-V is right around the corner, and could quickly end much of the ARM chip market if licensing deals are this onerous?
- teruakohatu 4y ago
  It is a short term cash grab, which will accelerate investment in RISC-V.
  - gary_0 4y ago
    RISC-V seems increasingly inevitable in much of ARM's former feeding grounds, something I doubt ARM is unaware of, so it makes sense from a business perspective to squeeze out every cent while you still can.
- xiphias2 4y ago
  It’s not just right around the corner, those chips are already in design phase: Jim Keller at Tenstorrent first wanted to license x86, then ARM to build AI chip, but as both said no, he went with RISC-V. The funniest part is that he licensed the RISC-V chip from SiFive, which is now part of Intel.
  - therealcamino 4y ago
    SiFive is not part of Intel. There were reportedly talks last year that fell through. https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-failed-to-buy-sifive https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-failed-to-buy-sifive
    - snvzz 4y ago
      Rumor is Intel made an offer and were laughed out of the room.
      - ErikCorry 4y ago
        Walking away from 2bn is gutsy.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
snvzz 4y ago
There's an IMHO better article[0] on the same subject. 0. https://www.semianalysis.com/p/arm-changes-business-model-oem-partners https://www.semianalysis.com/p/arm-changes-business-model-oe...
colechristensen 4y ago
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.
- ksec 4y ago
  Yes I am wondering if those are specific to Qualcomm. And we wont know until all the details are given. But from the POV of ARM, Qualcomm got Nuvia's license which was favourable to Startup, and Server Market. Qualcomm intend to use it on PC and Smartphone. Obviously ARM think the terms would be different but Qualcomm disagree. The original article and other media keeps painting it as some sort of revenge for not allowing Nvidia buying ARM. I dont even see how the two comes together when regulations and other parties are at play as well.
- Dracophoenix 4y ago
  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 acquired outright, Qualcomm would still have a strong case to claim that it does have architectural rights.
  - colechristensen 4y ago
    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.
Conan_Kudo 4y ago
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 fine, though.
- ErikCorry 4y ago
  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.
  - Conan_Kudo 4y ago
    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.
    - snvzz 4y ago
      >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.
jpgvm 4y ago
So it begins. RISC-V and Chinese chips are coming for ARMs lunch.
TheLoafOfBread 4y ago
Apple migrating to RISC-V in 3... 2... 1...
- jlokier 4y ago
  This change doesn't affect Apple. Apple has a perpetual "do whatever you want" license because they were involved with ARM early on.
KVFinn 4y ago
Isn't this basically the nightmare scenario that everyone feared about the NVIDIA acquisition?
- snvzz 4y ago
  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.

50 points by sanatgersappa 4y ago

That seems like an incredibly dumb decision. They do realize that RISC-V is right around the corner, and could quickly end much of the ARM chip market if licensing deals are this onerous?

teruakohatu 4y ago
It is a short term cash grab, which will accelerate investment in RISC-V.
- gary_0 4y ago
  RISC-V seems increasingly inevitable in much of ARM's former feeding grounds, something I doubt ARM is unaware of, so it makes sense from a business perspective to squeeze out every cent while you still can.
xiphias2 4y ago
It’s not just right around the corner, those chips are already in design phase: Jim Keller at Tenstorrent first wanted to license x86, then ARM to build AI chip, but as both said no, he went with RISC-V. The funniest part is that he licensed the RISC-V chip from SiFive, which is now part of Intel.
- therealcamino 4y ago
  SiFive is not part of Intel. There were reportedly talks last year that fell through. https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-failed-to-buy-sifive https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-failed-to-buy-sifive
  - snvzz 4y ago
    Rumor is Intel made an offer and were laughed out of the room.
    - ErikCorry 4y ago
      Walking away from 2bn is gutsy.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

snvzz 4y ago

There's an IMHO better article[0] on the same subject. 0. https://www.semianalysis.com/p/arm-changes-business-model-oem-partners https://www.semianalysis.com/p/arm-changes-business-model-oe...

colechristensen 4y ago

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.

ksec 4y ago
Yes I am wondering if those are specific to Qualcomm. And we wont know until all the details are given. But from the POV of ARM, Qualcomm got Nuvia's license which was favourable to Startup, and Server Market. Qualcomm intend to use it on PC and Smartphone. Obviously ARM think the terms would be different but Qualcomm disagree. The original article and other media keeps painting it as some sort of revenge for not allowing Nvidia buying ARM. I dont even see how the two comes together when regulations and other parties are at play as well.
Dracophoenix 4y ago
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 acquired outright, Qualcomm would still have a strong case to claim that it does have architectural rights.
- colechristensen 4y ago
  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.

Conan_Kudo 4y ago

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 fine, though.

ErikCorry 4y ago
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.
- Conan_Kudo 4y ago
  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.
  - snvzz 4y ago
    >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.

jpgvm 4y ago

So it begins. RISC-V and Chinese chips are coming for ARMs lunch.

TheLoafOfBread 4y ago

Apple migrating to RISC-V in 3... 2... 1...

jlokier 4y ago
This change doesn't affect Apple. Apple has a perpetual "do whatever you want" license because they were involved with ARM early on.

KVFinn 4y ago

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

snvzz 4y ago
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.