Luis Chamberlain sent out the modules changes today for the Linux 6.6 merge window. Most notable with the modules update is a change that better builds up the defenses against NVIDIA’s proprietary kernel driver from using GPL-only symbols. Or in other words, bits that only true open-source drivers should be utilizing and not proprietary kernel drivers like NVIDIA’s default Linux driver in respecting the original kernel code author’s intent.

Back in 2020 when the original defense was added, NVIDIA recommended avoiding the Linux 5.9 for the time being. They ended up having a supported driver several weeks later. It will be interesting to see this time how long Linux 6.6+ thwarts their kernel driver.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        32 years ago

        I know this isn’t going to stop people like you from continually telling me “Apple is bad,“ but I literally said in my other comment, “Apple has a lot of problems” lol

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          102 years ago

          It’s not that “Apple is bad” it’s that you’re commenting about how you’re glad that companies like Nvidia can’t fuck with you, while being seemingly oblivious to the fact that Apple absolutely can fuck with you because you’re running a proprietary OS using proprietary drivers on proprietary hardware. Apple has more power over you than Nvidia does over Linux users, yet you’re commenting here like Apple is a better choice.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            32 years ago

            Dude please read what I said. This is what I’m talking about. Apple screws with me in other ways. I am saying this is one specific angle they do not. It does not mean I think they’re squeaky clean. Actually read the words I’m writing. These aren’t long comments.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              42 years ago

              You specifically state that you’re glad that your CPU and GPU aren’t a vector for companies to fuck with you, but they are a vector for Apple to fuck with you. Apple just hasn’t done it (yet?)

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                4
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                Apple just hasn’t done it (yet)

                DINGDINGDING.

                One company is doing it. The other isn’t. If Apple starts doing it, then I will change over. Why is this difficult? 

                • lazyraccoon
                  link
                  fedilink
                  22 years ago

                  Your argument is sound, people question your rationalization.

                  Honestly, I’m not a graphical designer, so I can’t judge, and I suffer similarly by being forced to use Windows due to chimp-IT in my workplace,

                  but in general - using these vendor lock-in products should be avoided.

    • sky
      link
      fedilink
      282 years ago

      Yeah, you’re just running an entirely proprietary GPU that only Apple makes proprietary drivers for. Don’t see how that’s a win in any way?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        3
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Apple’s GPU at least isn’t maliciously designed to be difficult to write open-source drivers for. It’s up to the community to figure out how it works and write a driver, but Apple isn’t actively trying to stop them like NVIDIA is.

        • sky
          link
          fedilink
          22 years ago

          This is a fair point, and I’m not trying to defend NVIDIA’s behavior. I use an AMD GPU on Linux for a reason 😅

          The progress on Asahi Linux has me considering a M1 MacBook Air for real.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            42 years ago

            The progress on Asahi Linux is a demonstration of the difference I mentioned. People have been working on open-source NVIDIA drivers for ages and still can’t get the GPU out of first gear, whereas the M1 GPU driver is mostly functional after only a couple of years.

  • True Blue
    link
    fedilink
    5
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    I use Nvidia’s proprietary driver because the open-source Nouveau driver won’t work with my display. Will this update break the driver, or just make it slower?

    I’d love to stop using Nvidia, but I don’t have much choice about using their proprietary driver until I get my next video card, or Nouveau starts working for me.

    • Chewy
      link
      fedilink
      72 years ago

      It probably means it’ll take longer for Nvidia to release a driver for Linux 6.6 and might stop them from doing so. They’ll probably find a way to circumvent this and continue to violate the GPLv2 the kernel is licensed under.

      If your on a distro which gets a new kernel quickly it might be a good idea to pin Linux 6.5 so the system doesn’t update to a kernel which the driver doesn’t support. But whether that’s necessary woll probably be talked about more once 6.6 actually releases.

      PS: If your on a 2000 series or later GPU you might actually be able to use nouveau at some point, since there’s ongoing work on an open source Vulkan driver with actually useable performance. Thanks to Nvidia it definitely won’t work on Pascal and earlier.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        It probably means it’ll take longer for Nvidia to release a driver for Linux 6.6 and might stop them from doing so.

        This does not sound reasonable to me. Cloud AI is really strongly dependent on both Nvidia and Linux. In the building across from my office is an AI research lab with about $2M worth of Nvidia cards and using Linux is 100% non-negotiable. And that lab is small potatoes in the grand scheme of things. Think about all the data centres and research labs out there that are completely dependent on both Nvidia and Linux. I don’t think Nvidia would so flippantly say “welp, the kernel developers are being mean, so we’re going to stop participating in the cloud computing and research market”.

        This is twisting the screws on their revenue stream in a significant way. I don’t know what they’ll do: comply, get more sneaky, try to sue. But I don’t think they’ll just give up.

  • Carlos Solís
    link
    fedilink
    English
    782 years ago

    And that’s why I’m happy to see that the lock on modifying the Nvidia BIOS for their old graphics cards has finally been decrypted. That means that Nouveau will have a much easier route to make their open-source drivers work properly on the 10xx and 20xx cards, so we don’t have to rely on the tainted crumbs that Nvidia offered here. (Then again, I eventually moved to a 6600 specifically to no longer have to deal with this kind of shenanigans)

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      8
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Man, that would be so nice. I forgot actually for a while that I was using Nouveau after I switched cause nvidia-dkms wouldn’t let me boot (1050ti). The only thing that reminds me is game performance. Wayland is great though.

    • TimeSquirrel
      link
      fedilink
      5
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Yeah they’d do that with a card that looks like it’s from 2003 with those classic dual DVI ports. Stole it right out of some kid’s Quake 3 box. Try that with a 4090.

      • AggressivelyPassive
        link
        fedilink
        32 years ago

        Give the gigantic heatsink, that might actually work just fine. The PCI brackets are just stamped aluminium after all.

  • AutoTL;DRB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    192 years ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    The Linux 6.6 modules infrastructure is changing to better protect against the illicit behavior of NVIDIA’s proprietary kernel driver.

    Most notable with the modules update is a change that better builds up the defenses against NVIDIA’s proprietary kernel driver from using GPL-only symbols.

    Given that symbol_get was only ever intended for tightly cooperating modules using very internal symbols it is logical to restrict it to being used on EXPORY_SYMBOL_GPL and prevent nvidia from costly DMCA circumvention of access controls lawsuits.

    Luis Chamberlain further added in today’s pull request: "Christoph Hellwig’s symbol_get() fix to Nvidia’s efforts to circumvent the protection he put in place in year 2020 to prevent proprietary modules from using GPL only symbols, and also ensuring proprietary modules which export symbols grandfather their taint.

    The circumvention tactic used by Nvidia was to use symbol_get() to purposely swift through proprietary module symbols and completley bypass our traditional EXPORT_SYMBOL*() annotations and community agreed upon restrictions."

    Back in 2020 when the original defense was added, NVIDIA recommended avoiding the Linux 5.9 for the time being.


    The original article contains 476 words, the summary contains 174 words. Saved 63%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • Ertebolle
    link
    fedilink
    492 years ago

    a) Good for them

    b) How long before NVIDIA throws up their hands at the whole thing and does their own Linux distro + pushes all their cloud AI customers to use it? (it doesn’t seem like they’re ever going to be shamed / coerced into actually open-sourcing their driver)

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      32 years ago

      B) can’t happen because of gpl. Even if it could, not many customers will move to an nvidia distro. ML people need good distros and good drivers.

      If a hypothetical nvidia distro would speed up training by 10% but cause drop of productivity of humans of as small as 5%, no many will “buy” it. We can throw more hardware, people are the bottleneck nowadays

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      32
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      There’s an interesting discussion about the whole topic on the Phoronix forums about this. Some people claim that removing them and Nvidia’s current behavior is a DMCA violation:

      1. The kernel includes IP only licensed under GPLv2.
      2. While a module linked against the kernel isn’t necessarily a derived work which in turn would need to be licensed GPLv2 as well, there are specific interfaces that are meant for internal use and by their very nature would make your work derived if using them. These are the interfaces marked EXPORT_GPL_ONLY.
      3. Using these interfaces with a module not licensed GPLv2, you taint the kernel and violate the licensing.
      4. Removing the check, you aren’t necessarily yet violating GPLv2, but you’re removing a technical protection measure which is a violation of the DMCA.

      It also raises the question why you’d remove checks that only prevent a possible GPLv2 violation if you’re not violating GPLv2 anyways as Nvidia claims.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        42 years ago

        you aren’t necessarily yet violating GPLv2, but you’re removing a technical protection measure which is a violation of the DMCA.

        Isn’t overcoming a technical limit a violation itself? That’s what made DeCSS illegal. They didn’t have to prove anyone was actually copying DVDs with it, just that DeCSS could allow you to copy a DVD

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          12 years ago

          Yes, even if it’s a dialog box with only a “No” button, despite how easy it would be to get it to return a different value.

          DISCLAIMER: IANAL, this is not legal advice.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      22 years ago

      Not to be contrarian, but b) could well be a full decade of work and numerous individual projects

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      33
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Would having their own distro even help? It seems like working around this would require forking from Linux at a lower level, and even that would only circumvent technical (rather than copyright) barriers.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        62 years ago

        They can probably just drop some kernel packages in their driver PPAs or whatever. You don’t need to fork the whole distro to customize the kernel. But it will still be a huge pain.

      • bluGill
        link
        fedilink
        52 years ago

        They can beef of linux support of freebsd a little and do some other help to the desktop experience there. Freebsd has always been more pragmatic, and for most uses of an os you can’t tell a real world difference. (pkg instead of apt, and other such differences are minor)

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          82 years ago

          The userland differences are not too great, but I would assume a kernel module as significant as a modern GPU driver is pretty deeply tied to Linux’s kernel internals.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      22 years ago

      They already provide custom images for their Jetson modules, I think more NVIDIA distros are likely to happen one way or another.

  • 𝒍𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒏
    link
    fedilink
    320
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Oh wow the comments on Phoronix for this one are bonkers.

    From what I understand (because it wasn’t clear to me from either of the TLDRs posted here) Nvidia’s proprietary graphics driver has been calling parts of the kernel that they shouldn’t be, because their driver is closed source.

    These seem to be parts of the kernel that another company may own patents to, but has only licensed it to the kernel for free use with GPL open source code only, i.e. closed source/proprietary code is not allowed to use it.

    Nvidia seems to have open sourced a tiny communication shim to try and bypass this restriction, so their closed source driver talks to the shim, and the shim talks to the restricted code in the kernel, that Nvidia does not have a license to use. This is a DMCA violation, hence why the Kernel devs are putting in preventions to block the shim, as far as I can see.

    I don’t understand the small minority of commenters there defending a la soulless corp Nvidia, who is blatantly in the wrong here. Some commenters have gone as far as to call the Linux kernel maintainers “zealots”, would not be surprised if they are alts for Nvidia devs…

    Edit: typo

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      72 years ago

      Thanks for the ELI5. I read the article but had a hard time parsing the significance other than Nvidia proprietary drivers bad

      • LSlowmotion
        link
        fedilink
        132 years ago

        Remind me of those who supports Red Hat for blocking sources and telling those who downstreams “code thief with no contribution to open source” lol.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          162 years ago

          I did not “support” Red Hat but I was pretty vocally in opposition to most of the reaction to it. I found the willful inaccuracy and even flagrant dishonestly from the “community” close to disgusting at times. So, you may be including people like me in your comment.

          In this case, it seems very straight-forward that NVIDIA is in the wrong. Not just ethically but legally as well.

          My own read is that some of the people slamming Red Hat are defending NVIDIA now. Coming away from that experience, I the over-arching principle that many adhere to most is simply whatever is best for them. Red Hat was wrong because people felt entitled to something. The kernel devs are wrong ( and NVIDIA right ) because people feel entitled to something.

    • knexcar
      link
      fedilink
      192 years ago

      Because we don’t care about open source drama, we want an operating system that just works™ with our existing graphics cards and doesn’t get in the way of gaming.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        74
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Then let Nvidia deal with this drama of their own making. Linux works as intended.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            32 years ago

            The user experience is based around audited, reviewed, open source software. Everything from the licenses, distro policies, and kernel maintainership is based around that model and it has benefitted users far more than if Linux was a mess binary blobs that do not interoperate with each other in a well-defined and transparent manner.

            AMD and Intel both manage just fine, along with hundreds of other companies supporting hundreds of other pieces of hardware on top of dozens of different CPU architectures. If Nvidia insists on being a special snowflake about this then it is 100% their problem.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        612 years ago

        From a legal perspective, nvidia has been illegally bypassing a software license by exploiting a loophole. Linux devs fixed the loophole.

        I don’t see why I would be annoyed at Linux devs in these circumstances.

      • Solar Bear
        link
        fedilink
        English
        52 years ago

        Okay, then continue not caring as the people who do take care of things. Don’t worry your pretty little head about it.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        102 years ago

        It’s not going to effect 99% of users. Nvidia will update it as they have in the past. The large majority of distros use stable kernels by default, and it will be fixed before this makes it to one. You’re getting upset over something completely irrelevant to you.

        • knexcar
          link
          fedilink
          12 years ago

          That’s a fair point, I’m not super familiar with how the Linux dev cycle works beyond “I download Mint or Ubuntu because I don’t feel like shelling out for Windows 10”.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            42 years ago

            Distros like Ubuntu and Debian (and by extension Mint) will have their own kernel and driver packages. They will test to ensure that the package combinations they are shipping will work. I am certain they would not ship and update without functional nvidia drivers. Nvidia will most likely update their driver to function with these new protection before this change reaches a stable kernel anyways.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            22 years ago

            Just so we’re clear, you don’t feel like shelling for Microsoft but are okay to do so for NVIDIA? Don’t get me wrong, I also want a system that just works and I had never had a problem with using proprietary drivers, but if this doesn’t get “fixed” by the time that kernel becomes stable I’m switching to open source rather than keep an outdated kernel version, and I’m switching to AMD asap. Over a decade ago I switched to NVIDIA for a similar reason, and I discovered back then that it’s just not worth fighting against a proprietary driver that doesn’t co-operate with the system.

            • knexcar
              link
              fedilink
              22 years ago

              I’m still rocking the Windows 10 education license I got for “free” through college, but once Microsoft deprecates it I’ll consider switching to Linux. I have a Nvida card I got a long time ago, and I’d prefer to keep using it if possible. I haven’t looked into upgrading yet but when I do I’ve got to shell out no matter what brand I pick.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                22 years ago

                Depending on the card and your use case the open source drivers might be good enough, although more modern NVIDIA cards are clock locked to the proprietary driver. Nevertheless it’s almost a guarantee that NVIDIA will do something before this kernel goes live for any major distro.

                In short NVIDIA has been a crappy company in Linux support unfortunately until very recently they were the least worse option, but now with all of the other manufacturers open sourcing their drivers and not locking their GPUs NVIDIA is less and less appealing so the kernel developers can start to push back against their bullshit.

      • Shertson
        link
        fedilink
        212 years ago

        If that is the case, then you should be very happy to leave Linux for a proprietary OS that Nvidia works on and properly supports.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      52 years ago

      If it’s a dmca violation then sue them. Do not create software “defenses” and do not make my computer experience worse.

      • khi
        link
        fedilink
        182 years ago

        With what money are they supposed to fight the multi billion dollar mega corpo exactly with dozens of lawyers??

        Also, if they fight this in court then that would mean less money for development thus making your experience even worse….

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          32 years ago

          Well then don’t! Revenge code which makes it worse for people who actually use Linux isn’t a way to do this.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            162 years ago

            Yeah just roll over and set a precedent for large companies to violate the kernel’s license! It’s so much easier!

          • Solar Bear
            link
            fedilink
            English
            222 years ago

            Nvidia shipping proprietary code is what makes it worse for people who actually use Linux. They should open source their driver.

    • 520
      link
      fedilink
      882 years ago

      Then isn’t the correct solution to sue Nvidia?

      It’s a legal issue with a legal solution.

      • Nucelar
        link
        fedilink
        1312 years ago

        You dont sue someone with deeper pockets than you.

        • 520
          link
          fedilink
          102 years ago

          Neither is having your copyright infringed. Neither is wasting volunteer manpower playing a technical game of cat and mouse

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        822 years ago

        Yeah probably, but Nvidia can afford lawyers and delays for years. Much longer than any oss group could afford

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        282 years ago

        So you want the company that licensed the patents to the Linux kernel for open source use to have to sue Nvidia for wrongly using their code? You want the company to have to spend a bunch of money suing Nvidia and possibly lose which would open the flood gates to more closed source code leeching off the Linux kernel?

        Yeah that’s going to make them want to keep licensing their IP to the Linux Foundation (which they’re probably doing for free).

        Or the maintainers can just submit a fairly simple patch to ensure that the kernel and the patents are being respected. Do you really think the first approach is the way to go?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      142 years ago

      But why is it a problem if they call on parts of the kernal they shouldn’t? is it just a privacy concern, does it also impact performance? i don’t understand

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        92 years ago

        Because the license for the patents that the Linux kernel is utilizing says that the code utilizing those patents must be open source. So therefore Nvidia is accessing those parts of the kernel illegally and against the license the Linux Foundation has. The Linux Foundation could lose the rights to use those patents if they’re not respecting the license.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        372 years ago

        It is copyright infringement. Nvidia (and everyone writing kernel modules) has to choose between:

        • using the GPL-covered parts of the kernel interface and sharing their own source code under the GPL (a free software license)
        • not using the GPL-covered parts of the kernel interface

        Remember that the kernel is maintained by volunteers and by engineers funded by/working for many companies, including Nvidia’s direct competitors, and Nvidia is worth billions of dollars. Nvidia is incredibly obnoxious to infringe on the kernel’s copyright. To me it is 100% the appropriate response to show them zero tolerance for their copyright infringement.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          9
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          To expand a bit:

          The GPL-only symbols restriction is there for the benefit of proprietary developers. It ensures that their work doesn’t become a “derivative work” of the kernel’s internals, by sticking to using only the published and documented interfaces. Using published APIs doesn’t make your work a legally derivative work of the system behind those APIs (i.e. the kernel).

          If your code needs to mess around in the kernel internals, it is very likely a derivative work of the kernel; which means you need the permission of the kernel authors if you want to publish that code legally.

          The only terms under which the kernel authors grant that permission are the terms of the GPL.

          By circumventing the GPL-only symbols restriction, Nvidia is demonstrating that their driver code needs to mess with kernel internals, not just the published APIs. And that means that it probably is a derivative work of the kernel. Which, in turn, means that those drivers must be published under the GPL in order to avoid violating the kernel copyrights.

          Basically: Linus drew a line in the sand and said “As long as you don’t step over this line, you’re not pirating the kernel by releasing proprietary drivers.” And Nvidia stepped over that line.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        552 years ago

        As the commenter stated, it is a copyright issue. Nvidia is not allowed to use this code in a proprietary driver.

        • ahornsirup
          link
          fedilink
          62 years ago

          Which they technically didn’t. I’m sure Nvidia has a legal team that vetted their solution, they certainly have the money for it. At this point the “protection” against the proprietary driver is just anti-consumer.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            142 years ago

            And I’m sure Nvidia’s legal team knows that Linux is not going to take them to court for this because it isn’t worth it. Nvidia absolutely did violate the GPL, but they have the funds to avoid any legal trouble, hence why Linux goes this other router. I don’t see how this is anti-consumer, it will not significantly effect the consumer. Nvidia will simply have to update their driver like they did when these protections were first implemented.

        • JackbyDev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          42 years ago

          Wouldn’t that automatically make their code GPL?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            142 years ago

            If they want to use that code legally they should make their code GPL but i doubt there proprietary code gets automatically overrules. I wish it did.

            I do wonder what would happen if someone would hack and leak Nvidia’s code under the defense that they thought Nvidia to be operating legally therefor assuming there code is GPL, I presume Nvidia would need to officially confess their crime as a legal defense that they never ment to open source their own code.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              29
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              Free Software Foundation, Inc. Vs Cisco Systems Inc. disagrees. The FSF sued Linksys for violating the license for GCC, libc etc.

              And they were forced in court to release all their WRT stuff under GPL, which is how OpenWRT got its start.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                42 years ago

                They weren’t forced to do it. They did it as part of a settlement. The outcome if they had gone to trial and lost could well have been different.

                (Also how do you even violate the license for gcc while making a router?)

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                152 years ago

                Just the idea of nvidia being forced to open source there drivers makes me drool in sweet winners justice.

                But realistically, Nvidia feels like one of the more powerful corporations around do we stand a chance? I do hope FSF tries regardless.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  10
                  edit-2
                  2 years ago

                  Linksys was part of Cisco. They had veryy deep pockets, but the FSF & SFC prevailed regardless.

                  I doubt the FSF or SFC will go after Nvidia, this has been a long standing issue and I haven’t heard about any lawsuits being brought because of it, even before Nvidia had more money than God.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              82 years ago

              There are lots of problems here. First, if you have to “hack” something to get the code, then it likely invalidates your own defense that you thought you were allowed to release it. Second, even if you can prove that nVidia knows that they should have to GPL their code, you still have no legal right to hack something to get it. If the hacking is illegal, then it’s illegal, even if it’s done to enable an otherwise legal activity.

          • azuth
            link
            fedilink
            English
            332 years ago

            No it would just make Nvidia guilty of copyright infringement

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          52 years ago

          I don’t see how the copyright mechanism works here. The GPL has rules about linking to GPL code, enforced by the notion that the linked binary is a protected derivative work. Going and finding out where in memory some functions are and jumping to them is not going to create a derivative work.

          The Linux devs just have a rule about who they want to call these symbols and are trying to enforce it themselves.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      82 years ago

      I need to upgrade my computer soon… this crap makes me not want to go Nvidia again. (Running a looooong in the tooth 1060.)

      • bitwolf
        link
        fedilink
        22 years ago

        The new 150$ range Amd cards are enticing. I could bring new life into my rx5500 htpc.

      • ddh
        link
        fedilink
        English
        92 years ago

        Go ahead, I just ordered a new build specifically with a non-Nvidia card for the same reasons.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      282 years ago

      I don’t understand the small minority of commenters there defending a la soulless corp Nvidia, who is blatantly in the wrong here.

      They think they’re gonna get a free 4090 in the mail any day now.

    • lckdscl [they/them]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      112 years ago

      Agree with your analysis, just pointing out that Phoronix forums have always been like this, or at least the tendency is to insult each other. Their culture is more toxic than any other Linux forums I’ve seen, maybe besides /g/.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      752 years ago

      Just a perspective on why people would support NVIDIA here:

      • They don’t believe in copyright law so they don’t mind whoever infringe on them. Especially since here it would make the proprietary driver work better.

      • They do care about copyright law but think having a working driver outweighs respecting them.

      Not my opinion here just saying that for some people usability trumps any other aspects.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        142 years ago

        Also, some of us are using Nvidia because we rely on software that doesn’t work on AMD. I really enjoy using Linux, but if it’s going to make my life difficult I’ll go back to using Windows with WSL.

        I agree Nvidia should resolve the licensing issues, but man GPL zealots get a such a raging hard-on for anything Nvidia related it’s funny to watch.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            32 years ago

            3D rendering software using iRay. I’ve started trying to learn Blender, but I’ve still got thousands spent on assets and hardware which means I’m not going to run out tomorrow and pickup a new card. It all works fine under Wine, but the amount of Nvidia hate on here is just tiring.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              2
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              So you use iRay as the rendering engine for Blender? And (I’m assuming a lot here) iRay doesn’t use CUDA, OpenCL etc, but straight talks to the GPU via graphics drivers, thus having hardware depency for nvidia GPU?

        • Semperverus
          link
          fedilink
          English
          452 years ago

          Them becoming raging zealots is kind of the only realistic way to defend the GPL though. If they don’t, it’s just going to get treated like toilet paper. I’d much rather have the angry hate mob than to be disrespected by big companies who can otherwise just get away with whatever they want.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            32 years ago

            And I’d like hardware that works, and proprietary drivers are really the only way that happens

              • Cynetri (he/any)
                link
                fedilink
                English
                22 years ago

                Not to knock on your point but the AMD drivers on Linux don’t support hardware video encoding unfortunately, so technically it’s not full-featured

                • Kevin
                  link
                  fedilink
                  62 years ago

                  I take advantage of hardware video encoding on linux with amd’s open source drivers almost every day.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              162 years ago

              Why do you think that? Companies can open source their drivers at will, in fact at this point NVIDIA is the only major player in GPU market who hasn’t done this, what do you think makes this particular hardware so special that needs a closed source driver when every other competitor doesn’t? In fact what could possibly be the reason for a driver to need to be closed source?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          392 years ago

          Or maybe we should keep companies, which rake in billions of dollars, to a much higher standard??

          Nvidia could be better at open-sourcing their stuff. But they don’t. Blame them, not GPL.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          392 years ago

          It’s not going to effect you. No distro is going to ship a kernel that doesn’t work with the Nvidia driver, besides maybe some rolling ones, in which case you can just use the LTS kernel. This is drama between Nvidia and the rest of the kernel maintainers, and Nvidia will update their driver to deal with it, as they have done in the past.

          Shitting on people who care about FOSS because they don’t want to see massive companies get away with blatant copyright infringement is crazy.

      • Solar Bear
        link
        fedilink
        English
        972 years ago

        They don’t believe in copyright law so they don’t mind whoever infringe on them. Especially since here it would make the proprietary driver work better.

        I don’t believe in copyright law, but I especially don’t believe in partially enforced copyright law. Nvidia doesn’t get to use copyright to protect their proprietary code while infringing on the copyright of FOSS.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        72 years ago

        Good read. I think the root is simply, don’t care about the rights of others if it is going to cost them something personally.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    82 years ago

    Intentionally pushing changes that could brick a bunch of systems over legal complaints is imo reckless.

    This should be a last resort move. Has the Linux foundation started chasing nVidia over this? because it sounds like this is coming out of nowhere.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    26
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    I get why the Linux folks are doing this, but I don’t expect that it will make them popular with anyone who actually uses Nvidia drivers on Linux (which is a lot of people). I’m sure that my employer will choose up-to-date Nvidia drivers over up-to-date versions of the kernel, at least in the short term. In the long term it probably won’t be an issue since Nvidia will figure something out, but if it did become an issue then ultimately Nvidia driver support is non-negotiable for the company where I work.

    (No one cares what a small tech company does, but the big guys need Nvidia too so it should be possible to piggyback on whatever they do.)

    • Ulu-Mulu-no-die
      link
      fedilink
      English
      9
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      I think end users wouldn’t care either, they probably wouldn’t even understand what’s actually happening, they’ll only notice performance degrading (if this is the case) and blame Linux for it.

      That’s not to say this shouldn’t be done, I just wish there was better control on license violations and those doing it on purpose, like Nvidia in this case, would be seriously punished to make them think twice next time.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      432 years ago

      don’t expect that it will make them popular with anyone who actually uses Nvidia drivers on Linux

      The group to be annoyed at are Nvidia. Plain and simple.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        72 years ago

        From my closed-source corporate perspective, Nvidia is trying to improve performance and the Linux kernel maintainers are trying to stop them. I don’t see why I would be annoyed at Nvidia in these circumstances.

        • Nucelar
          link
          fedilink
          82 years ago

          You can always make your own kernel and enforce whatever stupid laws you want on it then.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          22 years ago

          From a corporate perspective you should be VERY worried about this, GPL is infectious, so if NVIDIA drivers are using GPL only parts of the kernel they become GPL, and because NVIDIA doesn’t offer GPL only endpoint the license applies to everything, meaning that if your company is using the NVIDIA driver in any way shape or form anything you produce becomes GPL as well. NVIDIA has enough lawyers to delay the enforcing of this, which is why they’ll never get sued, does YOUR company has enough lawyers to keep FSF at bay? If not you should be very annoyed at NVIDIA for not providing a license term for their GPL driver (and legally their driver IS GPL if it uses those endpoints).

          And here’s the thing, for a home user not updating the kernel is good enough, for a company it’s not because this is a bug fix, not new implementation, NVIDIA is already in breach of license.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          41
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          From a legal perspective, nvidia has been illegally bypassing a software license by exploiting a loophole. Linux devs fixed the loophole.

          I don’t see why I would be annoyed at Linux devs in these circumstances.

        • True Blue
          link
          fedilink
          52 years ago

          Nvidia is undermining patent law. That should be an issue that big corpos can understand.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 years ago

            I did say that I get why the Linux folks are doing this. The problem is that Nvidia drivers that obey these restrictions and as a result have significantly worse performance than Nvidia drivers on other operating systems aren’t the solution either. Anyone who does serious GPU computing will still have to switch away from Linux.

            (IMO Nvidia would be insane to open-source their drivers. Like sue-corporate-officers-for-breach-of-duty level insane. So they can’t do more than what they’re already doing: coming up with workarounds.)

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              112 years ago

              Would they though? They sell their hardware, not their drivers, or am I misunderstanding something about Nvidia?

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                12 years ago

                Of course I can’t know for sure because the driver is closed-source, but I’d bet that a lot of what makes Nvidia hardware work fast is actually in the driver rather than the hardware itself. Plus, a proprietary driver lets them lock people in to buying their hardware. The company where I work doesn’t use Nvidia software because it buys Nvidia GPUs. It buys Nvidia GPUs because it uses Nvidia software.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  72 years ago

                  I don’t believe that even for a second. Software doesn’t make hardware run faster. It can certainly slow it down. But it doesn’t make it run better.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  2
                  edit-2
                  2 years ago

                  Oh yes sure, the software make nvidia gpu better, something that probably most of the hundred if not thousand of contributor to the mesa driver and in the list we have amd, intel, collabora, redhat, nouveau, google, valve and many others didn’t see, they were the only one in the entire silicon valley to find this secret sauce to make gpus better with software.

              • Ulu-Mulu-no-die
                link
                fedilink
                English
                22 years ago

                Is it possible that by revealing their drivers they would also reveal something about their industry designs?

                I mean, just building the hardware and letting the community do all the work on drivers for free would be better, if they don’t do it there must be a valid reason I think.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  22 years ago

                  Their drivers were already leaked, any secrets they were trying to hide are out in the wild, so that point is moot.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  52 years ago

                  I mean, they make money of selling the hardware from what I understand. Maybe I’m misunderstanding, and that’s the problem. Maybe they make money off the driver’s too.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              262 years ago

              AMD’s doing pretty well with their open source drivers, I suppose its up to nvidia if they want to offer a worse product simply so they can keep as much profits as possible.

              But leveraging other peoples work via open source code, to improve their product - then still not donating nor contributing back to the source? Not only illegal but scummy as hell.

              We may not be as offended as the kernel devs, but theyre the ones whos work is being stolen, so I wouldn’t be so quick to tell them what to do

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                42 years ago

                I wouldn’t say AMD is doing pretty well - it isn’t a serious competitor to Nvidia in the GPU computing market.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  42 years ago

                  No idea why you’re getting downvoted. Outside of the increasingly small desktop gpu market AMD is completely irrelevant in professional GPU use. They’re not even remotely close to being a competitor

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 years ago

          Nvidia could choose to improve performance using non-illegal tactics.

          They haven’t.

          I’m happy to live in a society wherev we support those upholding the law.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        8
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        For most people, principle takes a backseat to pragmatics. If your livelihood is training ML models on thousands of nVidia cards or whatever, you care less about who to be mad at and more about not laying off your staff and shutting the doors. You can’t replace nVidia. You can replace the latest kernel.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          62 years ago

          If your livelihood depends on a company breaking the law, you’ve got other issues.

          Nvidia could choose to follow the law, their customers could choose to support them in that.

          Part of the reason you can’t replace Nvidia, is because they get ahead by breaking the law. This makes it harder to compete with them.

          Now you’re stuck with only Nvidia, and welcome to monopoly hell. A bit exaggerated I know, but it’s his it happens.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            22 years ago

            If your livelihood depends on a company breaking the law, you’ve got other issues.

            That’s a pretty naive view of the world. If I buy 50,000 Android devices to support my company’s field sales operation, I’m not going to collect them all and put them in a trash compactor just because Oracle decides to pick a copyright fight with Google. If you work for any large-ish company, your employer is probably engaged in dozens of active lawsuits right now. That’s just how the world works.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 years ago

              That’s just how the world works.

              And that’s kind of the discussion here.

              Some people are annoyed at the Linux Devs because “fuck it, everyone breaks the law and it doesn’t matter”. Some people are annoyed at Nvidia because they’d like to uphold or social contracts.

              In don’t think it’s naive to want to live in a world and support a society that supports the law. I do think we have bigger issues that people are happy with this behaviour and are actively defending it.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                12 years ago

                I’m not saying you shouldn’t want companies to obey the laws. I’m specifically responding to the idea of “if your business relies on companies breaking the law, you have bigger problems”. The idea that you’ll dramatically tear apart and rebuild your supply chain literally every week as one company or another is sued for something that doesn’t concern you is what’s naive. Even just looking at patents, every company that writes software is a time bomb, because there are hundreds of thousands of bullshit patents that cover extremely broad and obvious ideas. This can’t be your problem, or you’ll never actually get around to doing the thing your company does.

    • Rikudou_Sage
      link
      fedilink
      52 years ago

      I use Nvidia drivers on Linux and fully support it. You know what else is non-negotiable? Linux support for Nvidia. Huge chunk of their money comes from people using their GPUs on Linux for machine learning. And while they can use older kernels for now (because they’re still supported), they won’t be able to forever. And corporates will want a supported OS with their Nvidia card.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        12 years ago

        And while they can use older kernels for now (because they’re still supported), they won’t be able to forever.

        It might even happen that the change gets back ported upstream; that would mean that every supported kernel has the changes in place, regardless of version.

        • Rikudou_Sage
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 years ago

          It might, though I don’t really see it happening with this change.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    142 years ago

    I’d rather have working proprietary drivers than broken open source ones, which seem to be our only options. I find it real hard to side with Linux here as they’re going to make performance worse for a platform that already struggles.

    And people wonder why Linux will never take off on the desktop. Stuff as basic as this will make sure anyone semi-casual about pc use will have issues with Linux.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      72 years ago

      Or maybe to keep doing social pressure on nvidia and make them feel guilty ,that they finally realse and did support of open version drivers not only for gtx 1650+ and fot more old cards.Because their source codes was published when hackers hacked their infrastructure and leaked source code.

    • SSUPII
      link
      fedilink
      62 years ago

      Just the existence of CUDA means Linux must remain a target for Nvidia.

      Also, this can be quite easily compared to Windows changing their driver’s structure and functionality. And Microsoft did it many times in the past.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      20
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Or maybe we shouldn’t just accept trillion dollar companies doing whatever the fuck they want?

      Nvidia is clearly in the wrong here, and infringing on copyright. Do you want to set the precedent that companies can just ignore copyright? Meanwhile when we certainly can’t ignore theirs?

      Maybe we should hold the companies to a higher standard. And not roll over and give in basically as soon as they do something we don’t like, compromising the foundation and good parts of what we already have, in this case Linux. Open source and GPL is the lifeblood of Linux, it’s what makes it as good and useful as it is.

  • AceFour
    link
    fedilink
    02 years ago

    Perfect timing buying an AMD card yesterday to replace my old NVidia. Installed today, works like a champ. Issue resolved

      • Psy-Q
        link
        fedilink
        02 years ago

        What were some of the positives and negatives? Me personally, I have an RDNA2 card and got bitten by the gamma being too dark on hardware cursors (now resolved) and memory clock stuck at 1 GHz with some refresh rates (workaround is not to use refresh above ~144 Hz).

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I have an RDNA3 card (upgraded from a 1080) and am running a multi-boot triple-head setup with mixed refresh rates (60, 144).

          Pros: most things work and work well. Installation of the physical card went without a hitch and it was relatively simple to install the drivers. No issues with web video, streaming, video encoding, or standard use.

          Cons: mesa, amdgpu, and Windows drivers are all lacking significant features - I am still unable to reliably control fan curves/speeds, clock speeds, etc. FreeSync is unusable as well. I have also been experiencing regular crashes on certain games (BG3, Apex Legends, etc.) and support has been nonexistent, despite similar complaints from other users. When the card does crash, it usually results in a ring timeout and an accompanied total session crash. AMD does not seem to be responsive to these issues in either their official forum or any other space where people are lodging complaints.

          The hardware seems fine; the drivers are the main issue. If I had to do it over again, I’d hold my nose and buy NVIDIA.

          EDIT: regarding the cursor issue, I’ve had to switch to a software cursor on Linux. The hardware cursor wasn’t showing up at all.

          Regarding game-specific issues, it seems a lot of problems stem from either a greedy low power mode or DirectX issues. I’ve had to set udev rules to alleviate some of my issues, but it hasn’t solved everything.

          EDIT 2: For anyone who comes across this post, it seems like the vast majority of the crashes on linux have been resolved as of kernel 6.7. Still lacking fine-grained control over fans/clocks, but stability seems much improved.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    72 years ago

    It’s sad to see the 100500th confrontation between the people who have never contributed to the kernel, yet they want to deprive others of using their existing GPU with Linux and instead force them to buy a new GPU. This screams of of being elitist and haughty but I just don’t care any longer. Too tired of hatred, aggression, animosity and verbal attacks. This has really propelled Linux, oh, wait, it’s only shown what kind of people represent Open Source.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      122 years ago

      It’s kind of like using DRM to combat piracy in regards to multimedia. The Linux kernel is under a certain license and the kernel developers feel NVidia is encroaching on their IP in a way that is against the copyright. They won’t give NVidia an exemption despite their obvious importance in the hardware industry.

      It may seem aggressive but look at how Nintendo, Disney, etc. regard those who break their own plans/trademarks. If you don’t take your own IP seriously, the law won’t either.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        42 years ago

        DRM is a good comparison, imagine there exists a DRM measure that doesn’t affect rightful owners in any way shape or form but prevents piracy, would you be against it?

        Personally I would be 100% okay with that, the problem is that DRM usually causes issues to rightful users and doesn’t prevent piracy. This change on the Kernel seems to be that perfect DRM, it won’t affect any rightful driver but prevents companies from pirating the Linux Kernel.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      19
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Those “haughty” “elitists” wrote your operating system and gave it to you for free. Have some gratitude, and direct your complaints to the uncooperative scoundrels in charge of NVIDIA who created this whole problem.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Dude are you Avis from the phoronix forums¿? This comment is the exact copy of his/her comment there.

  • Rayspekt
    link
    fedilink
    102 years ago

    Can someone ELI5 what this is about? Why does Nvidia wants to access parts if the Linux kernel and why are linux kernel maintainers against it? Wouldn’t it be good if Nvidia uses more open-source stuff?

    • SSUPII
      link
      fedilink
      22
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Open source software is given with specific licenses. The Linux kernel is made of many smaller open-source components that each can have their own license. Some of the licenses used disallow the partial or full usage of the licensed software or components in proprietary settings, or in general given usage for specific cases only (in this case, the Nvidia driver using components they are not licensed to use.).