Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 11th May 2007 18:17 UTC, submitted by diegocg
Intel "The Intel 965GM Express Chipset represents the first mobile product that implements fourth generation Intel graphics architecture. Designed to support advanced rendering features in modern graphics APIs, this chipset includes support for programmable vertex, geometry, and fragment shaders. Extending Intel's commitment to work with the X.org and Mesa communities to continuously improve and enhance the drivers, support for this new chipset is provided through the X.org 2.0 Intel driver and the Mesa 6.5.3 releases. These drivers represent significant work by both Intel and the broader open source community."
Thread beginning with comment 239516
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: OpenGL support
by butters on Fri 11th May 2007 22:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: OpenGL support"
butters
Member since:
2005-07-08

On all of these *nix systems, the majority of the driver support lives in userspace and interacts with the driver interface in the X server, which is under a non-copyleft, non-share-alike license. The part that involves the kernel is the direct rendering code, which interacts with the DRI framework. To get around the linking problem with the Linux kernel, this part of the nVidia driver lives in userspace and talks to a GPL shim layer that they load into the kernel. If the DRI changes, they only need to update their shim.

FreeBSD and Solaris face challenges because Linux DRI is advancing beyond their capabilities, mainly due to contributions from Intel. FreeBSD and especially Solaris are mostly locked into the frameworks they have. This is the double-edged sword of stable interfaces. As nVidia works to keep their shim in sync with Linux DRI, it becomes a hassle to continue to support these other kernels.

In his "infinite wisdom," Linus decided that eventually people's patience with--and trust in--proprietary drivers will run out, making stable in-kernel interfaces a non-issue. The Linux kernel development model works great for OSS drivers, and most hardware will eventually be supported by OSS drivers. Our suffering is temporary and for a good reason.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: OpenGL support
by kaiwai on Fri 11th May 2007 23:10 in reply to "RE[3]: OpenGL support"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

FreeBSD and Solaris face challenges because Linux DRI is advancing beyond their capabilities, mainly due to contributions from Intel. FreeBSD and especially Solaris are mostly locked into the frameworks they have. This is the double-edged sword of stable interfaces. As nVidia works to keep their shim in sync with Linux DRI, it becomes a hassle to continue to support these other kernels.


Pardon - you do realise that DRI exists in both Solaris and FreeBSD; Solaris has the Intel driver merged, the DRI merged and Mesa is included with Solaris as well.

There is no double edge to a stable interface - what it does mean is this; when you design an interface, it'll take longer - rather than throwing ideas at a wall and see what sticks, it'll require going away, designing, arguing, debating, analysing then implementing - sure, it'll take longer, but what it means is that the API has been properly thought out before being merged - and better still modular enough so that new features can be added without breaking compatibility.

A prime example of this would be Solaris's new network driver API which covers all the facits of networking, and when features are added, such as WPA support, all wireless drivers support it by virtue of it being in the actual driver API rather than it being an after thought.

I don't want to bash Linux, but to me, it always seems that people just keep throwing ideas and see what sticks rather than sitting down and logically thinking out what the requirements of the API are and all the various issues that surround it.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[5]: OpenGL support
by butters on Fri 11th May 2007 23:42 in reply to "RE[4]: OpenGL support"
butters Member since:
2005-07-08

Of course Solaris and FreeBSD have their own DRI implementations. I won't argue that ;-) But Linux DRI is receiving contributions from Intel and others that aren't going into the other kernels.

Yes, these are two very different development models, and I would hesitate to argue that one is clearly better than the other. They both have their advantages and disadvantages, and although Linux has had some success, it's too early to pass judgment on whether their development model is appropriate for the mature and widely-deployed OS that it aspires to become.

The pattern for Linux driver frameworks starts with organic development followed by a unification effort or two. SCSI, Ethernet, and USB reached their current state of maturity through this process, and 802.11 is undergoing its reconstructive surgery right now. The end results are generally very good, and that might have something to do with the number of ideas that get hurled at the wall, so to speak.

If Solaris is to compete with Linux head-to-head, then a stable driver interface is going to be a strong selling point. By that point, though, it may be that most of the Linux driver interfaces will have already reached a state of de facto stability. We'll see ;-)

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[5]: OpenGL support
by adamk on Sat 12th May 2007 13:24 in reply to "RE[4]: OpenGL support"
adamk Member since:
2005-07-08

Pardon - you do realise that DRI exists in both Solaris and FreeBSD; Solaris has the Intel driver merged, the DRI merged and Mesa is included with Solaris as well.

I can't speak on the Solaris situation, but I should point out that FreeBSD is using an older DRI interface, and that AIGLX is currently broken on Intel and Radeon cars under FreeBSD.

Adam

Reply Parent Score: 1