[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Getting Intel Cedarview drivers into Debian



On Sat, 2012-12-22 at 03:00 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 12/21/2012 09:23 PM, Mikko Rasa wrote:
> > Hi Debian developers,
> >
> > I'm working as a consultant on a project to develop drivers for the
> > PowerVR graphics processor in the Cedarview family of Intel Atom
> > microprocessors in a Debian environment.  The current target is
> > Wheezy, and Intel wishes to get the drivers into the official
> > distribution.
> >
> > What they've failed to take into account is that Wheezy is currently
> > frozen in preparation of release, so I'm more than a bit skeptical of
> > getting a new package in (I was only brought in to the project very
> > recently).  However, I promised to ask you about this, so here we go.
> >
> > It should be noted that due to licensing issues, the driver will be
> > closed source.  The kernel component is under the GPL, so a dkms
> > package will be made.
> 
> I'm surprised. Wasn't Intel committed to support Opensource for all if
> their drivers? Are they changing their policy? If so, that's quite bad,
> since both ATI and Nvidia have been annoying all the community,
> insisting with non-free drivers. If we're stuck with no alternative,
> with Intel also going closed source, what type of hardware can we buy
> then? :(

This has nothing to do with the GPUs built into Intel's
Core/Xeon/Pentium processors, which continue to be supported by the
i915/intel kernel/Xorg/libdrm/Mesa drivers.

For Atom SoCs and chipsets, Intel has long used the PowerVR GPUs
designed by Imagination, which the latter considers to be Valuable
Intellectual Property.  However, I think everything aside from the
actual GPU is Intel-designed so we get documentation and free drivers
for 'dumb framebuffer' functionality.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Make three consecutive correct guesses and you will be considered an expert.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: