Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: Part 2 Of Nouveau Saga: The Microcode

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    PL
    Posts
    912

    Default

    His point is valid, the OSS community tends to improve faster when the code is consolidated upstream rather than having everyone maintain their individual patch sets.
    just a few months ago i would nitpick that linus wants as much as possible developed in-tree, but he rejects crap code.

    fortunately staging drivers feature appeared and it makes it possible to develop incomplete/testing code in-kernel, so i find his point valid.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2

    Default markmail

    Quote Originally Posted by Fazer View Post
    "I will not link to SourceForge mailing list archives."

    They are crap to navigate. In fact, I have no idea how I can easily go to previous/next message in the thread there.
    The markmail.org interface is really nice. Here's a link to the nouveau discussion:

    http://markmail.org/message/wgczkuh55ehvcwsw

    Their search and filtering is also pretty good.

  3. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    The part that makes no sense to me is that apparently Red Hat's lawyers are saying it's fine to develop this ourselves inside Fedora, but not in the official Linux kernel which we don't control. I mean, in any reasonable universe, wouldn't it be the opposite? I would think that putting it in Fedora only would mean more legal risk to them, and it would be less if it was in someone elses repository.
    You have certainly missed a key part of the debate. Dave Airlie from Red Hat explained this at

    http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/m...mail.gmail.com

  4. #24

    Default

    It look like the nouveau driver was finally pulled into staging (at least linus was finally requested to do so : http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/m...ynet.skynet.ie).

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xheyther View Post
    It look like the nouveau driver was finally pulled into staging (at least linus was finally requested to do so : http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/m...ynet.skynet.ie).
    Nice. If it goes in, maybe Ubuntu will re-think their decision with 10.04LTS&2.6.32.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    161

    Default

    It's interesting how quickly, one the roadblocks are identified, something can be resolved (at least in part)

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut,USA
    Posts
    965

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    Reverse engineering does not protect you as far as possible patent restrictions. If nvidia for example has a patent on a process and that the reversed engineered firmware duplicates obtained in a clean room environment, from scratch or copying knowingly or not, it may very well infringe on patents made by nvidia or partners they license from. A simplified example:

    Two guys are inventors, they both are developing mouse traps. Guy A has a piece of wood, a spring, and some stiff wire and comes up with the spring trap and patents it. Guy B with the same materials without even knowing it has already been patented comes up with a design looking very similar in looks and functionality and uses the same principals. Guy B is in patent infringement if he tries to market it (price really isn't a issue here, could be a freebie or charging for it).

    Bottom line is patent infringement, no matter if it is ignorant of the patent or not, is still illegal in the eyes of patent law.
    Good point. Just what I meant in my earlier post. Nvidia should say something about this issue as well. If there's IP in the microcode they want to protect, whether theirs or the 3rd parties, they need to say something so the developers are aware of the patent implications

    I would suggest that the firmware be at least nonfree and restricted...and kept in a separate package or at least be made available for download from appropriate locations
    Last edited by DeepDayze; 12-11-2009 at 02:34 PM.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeepDayze View Post
    Good point. Just what I meant in my earlier post. Nvidia should say something about this issue as well. If there's IP in the microcode they want to protect, whether theirs or the 3rd parties, they need to say something so the developers are aware of the patent implications
    True, nvidia are the only ones that can verify this. It would be in the best interest of the nouveau devs to be pro-active and ask nvidia to take a look at it to check for these possible infringements. If none are found then fine. If there is then see if some sort of solution like On2 and Xiph.org did with the patents utilized in theora.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut,USA
    Posts
    965

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    True, nvidia are the only ones that can verify this. It would be in the best interest of the nouveau devs to be pro-active and ask nvidia to take a look at it to check for these possible infringements. If none are found then fine. If there is then see if some sort of solution like On2 and Xiph.org did with the patents utilized in theora.
    That'll be the good way to go about it. If nvidia gives its blessing then all's good

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    9

    Default Part 2 Of Nouveau Saga The Microcode

    Ubuntu vote here. Ive tried RedHat and Fedora in the past but just didnt get on as well them.

    I like ubuntus wiki as well which has probably helped my learning process.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •