4 ms·

We're not paranoid; that resistribution restriction on our driver didn't come from us (I work for PowerVR). As a rule of thumb, it's the device or SoC vendor th

by rys 15y ago

We're not paranoid; that resistribution restriction on our driver didn't come from us (I work for PowerVR). As a rule of thumb, it's the device or SoC vendor that calls those shots and controls redistribution.

angusgr 15y ago
Thanks for clarifying. I admit that I was very put off when I downloaded the Nexus drivers and had to scroll though all the legalese just to use them (I was actually messing with a Samsung S5P SoC on a different board and I was hoping that I might be able to reuse those drivers there - no dice as per the EULA.). Is there any reason why PowerVR don't release userland binary libraries for download themselves? Is it just that the libraries are too closely wedded to specific kernel modules and the like? Or specific hardware revisions? (I noticed breaking changes between different version of the pvr kernel module sources.) Or is it more just that there's no real incentive to bother?
- rys 15y ago
  Purely technically, it wouldn't be too difficult for us to release something. The driver tends to be coupled to the SoC, rather than the graphics core (and core revision), due to integration with the SoC's display hardware, so we'd release drivers for a 'platform' rather than our graphics IP. That's what Google did for Nexus S, so we'd follow that model. The big thing stopping us is support and maintaining the code that does the graphics IP to SoC coupling. We could dump that burden on the SoC/platform vendor (like with Google), but eventually code support just swims upstream to us and we don't have the resources right now to handle that for a large number of SoCs. Apologies that the EULA prevented you from using those drivers on another S5PC110 platform, I really wish that wasn't the case.
throwaway1111 15y ago
I interviewed once for a graphics driver programming position for Imagination Tech. (who own PowerVR) and my impression was that they were indeed absolutely paranoid about open source. The first thing the guy had a go at me for was my pretty meager contributions to open source. Apparently this was a solid indicator that I would give out all the company secrets!
- rys 15y ago
  If the interviewer had a problem with your open source contributions then I'm sorry, since that really shouldn't be any problem for us whatsoever. There is absolutely no feeling at the company that open source equals the leak of secrets, and I find it hard to believe your story because of that.

by rys 15y ago

angusgr 15y ago

Thanks for clarifying. I admit that I was very put off when I downloaded the Nexus drivers and had to scroll though all the legalese just to use them (I was actually messing with a Samsung S5P SoC on a different board and I was hoping that I might be able to reuse those drivers there - no dice as per the EULA.). Is there any reason why PowerVR don't release userland binary libraries for download themselves? Is it just that the libraries are too closely wedded to specific kernel modules and the like? Or specific hardware revisions? (I noticed breaking changes between different version of the pvr kernel module sources.) Or is it more just that there's no real incentive to bother?

rys 15y ago
Purely technically, it wouldn't be too difficult for us to release something. The driver tends to be coupled to the SoC, rather than the graphics core (and core revision), due to integration with the SoC's display hardware, so we'd release drivers for a 'platform' rather than our graphics IP. That's what Google did for Nexus S, so we'd follow that model. The big thing stopping us is support and maintaining the code that does the graphics IP to SoC coupling. We could dump that burden on the SoC/platform vendor (like with Google), but eventually code support just swims upstream to us and we don't have the resources right now to handle that for a large number of SoCs. Apologies that the EULA prevented you from using those drivers on another S5PC110 platform, I really wish that wasn't the case.

throwaway1111 15y ago

I interviewed once for a graphics driver programming position for Imagination Tech. (who own PowerVR) and my impression was that they were indeed absolutely paranoid about open source. The first thing the guy had a go at me for was my pretty meager contributions to open source. Apparently this was a solid indicator that I would give out all the company secrets!

rys 15y ago
If the interviewer had a problem with your open source contributions then I'm sorry, since that really shouldn't be any problem for us whatsoever. There is absolutely no feeling at the company that open source equals the leak of secrets, and I find it hard to believe your story because of that.