linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: James Clark <jimwclark@ntlworld.com>
To: Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Driver Model 2 Proposal - Linux Kernel Performance v Usability
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 22:16:03 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200309042216.03958.jimwclark@ntlworld.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030904202707.GF13676@matchmail.com>

I agree that at first sight the two concepts (Binary 'plugins' and GPL) don't 
mix well but this is actually FUD which obscures the issue of making the 
kernel much easier to deal with for the masses. Like it or not, 99+% of 
'potential users' don't want/need to recompile their whole kernel, with the 
risks that it has, to add one minor feature.

James


On Thursday 04 Sep 2003 9:27 pm, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 09:14:45PM +0100, James Clark wrote:
> > Thank you for this (and the few other) sensible appraisal of my
> > 'proposal'.
> >
> > I'm very surprised by the number of posts that have ranted about
> > Open/Close source, GPL/taint issues etc. This is not about source code it
> > is about making Linux usable by the masses. It may be technically
> > superior to follow the current model, but if the barrier to entry is very
> > high (and it is!) then the project will continue to be a niche project. A
> > binary model doesn't alter the community or the benefits of public source
> > code. I agree that it is an extra interface and will carry a performance
> > hit - I think this is worth it.
>
> The thing is, most Linux developers (and I'm sure it's above 51% or maybe
> they're just louder?) want drivers to be GPL compatible open source. 
> Having a static binary driver interface just doesn't mix very well for
> that.  And as things happen (and how it should be), in a well kept stable
> series, the binary interfaces won't change that much.  But it will change
> for different options, like SMP, preempt, numa, etc.
>
> > Windows has many faults but drivers are often compatible across major
> > releases and VERY compatible across minor releases. It is no accident
> > that it has 90% of the desktop market. If we are going to improve this
> > situation this issue MUST be confronted.
>
> Have you ever seen the source code available for a windows driver?  Windows
> doesn't let you customize the kernel.  You just get what they give you.
> With the customization possible in Linux you get many advantages, and the
> disadvantage that the binary interface can change depending on the compile
> options.
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/


  reply	other threads:[~2003-09-04 21:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1062637356.846.3471.camel@cube>
2003-09-04 20:14 ` Driver Model 2 Proposal - Linux Kernel Performance v Usability James Clark
2003-09-04 20:27   ` Mike Fedyk
2003-09-04 21:16     ` James Clark [this message]
2003-09-04 21:50       ` Mike Fedyk
2003-09-04 22:10       ` insecure
2003-09-04 22:01     ` jdow
2003-09-04 20:29   ` Rik van Riel
2003-09-04 21:12     ` James Clark
2003-09-04 21:40       ` Alan Cox
2003-09-04 21:41       ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2003-09-04 22:19       ` Jamie Lokier
2003-09-04 21:29   ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-09-04 21:51     ` James Clark
2003-09-04 22:06       ` Alan Cox
2003-09-04 22:10       ` Martin Mares
2003-09-04 22:23       ` Gustav Petersson
2003-09-05 17:52       ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-09-05 18:31         ` James Clark
2003-09-05 18:59           ` Martin Schlemmer
2003-09-05 19:12           ` Dale P. Smith
2003-09-05 19:45             ` Stan Bubrouski
2003-09-05 19:59           ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-09-05 20:01             ` James Clark
2003-09-05 20:08           ` Mike Fedyk
2003-09-05 21:15           ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-09-05 23:19             ` Bernd Eckenfels
2003-09-10 20:50     ` Timothy Miller
2003-09-10 20:48       ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-09-10 23:22         ` James Clark
2003-09-10 23:58           ` Greg KH
2003-09-12 20:51         ` Timothy Miller
2003-09-12 20:55           ` Tim Hockin
2003-09-15 11:39           ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-09-05 20:53 Chad Kitching
2003-09-05 23:30 ` Mike Fedyk
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-09-04 22:41 Chad Kitching
2003-09-03 17:53 James Clark
2003-09-03 17:49 ` Andre Hedrick
2003-09-03 18:23   ` Guillaume Morin
2003-09-04  4:10     ` Andre Hedrick
2003-09-03 18:35   ` Guillaume Morin
2003-09-03 19:30     ` Andre Hedrick
2003-09-03 18:18 ` Greg KH
2003-09-03 18:23 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-09-03 18:49 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-09-03 18:58 ` Gábor Lénárt
2003-09-03 20:18 ` Christoph Hellwig

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200309042216.03958.jimwclark@ntlworld.com \
    --to=jimwclark@ntlworld.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mfedyk@matchmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).