Re: ATI to provide specs (was: Re: SMedia 3362)
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 12:10:48PM -0700, Shawn Rutledge wrote: > On 9/10/07, Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > So what exactly is not enough? You will get 100% free software drivers, > > down to the latest bit, no proprietary firmware whatsoever, plus > > hardware documentation that will be prepared by OpenMoko ? > > I didn't understand before that it would end up being 100% open > source. We always said it would be entirely open source. Anything else is not acceptable! > I thought you had to sign an NDA? But if the driver is to be > completely open, and the documents are to be completely open too, what > is the purpose of the NDA? The purpose of the NDA is to prevent OpenMoko from releasing the WinCE driver source code and/or the original documentation (or portions thereof), at least not without explicit approval from Smedia. The new free driver based on that infromation is explicitly excluded. It always depends on the exact wording of the NDA, what informaiton is not supposed to be disclosed, etc.! > No, getting it working is the more important of the two, of course. > But as someone else pointed out, maybe there is the possibility that > someone outside your small team could help, if the NDA doesn't prevent > it. no, that's impossible. > What kind of driver are you planning on? (I don't think I saw that > answered yet, sorry if I missed it) KDrive, DRI, etc... We don't disclose this information yet, sorry. As soon as there is something working, it will be in our subversion, though. > Well the choices for open hardware are always slim, so far. I just > thought some people might be putting more emphasis on OpenGL ES > support than openness. To us, the openness is alwayts the primary issue at stake. -- - Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://openmoko.org/ Software for the world's first truly open Free Software mobile phone ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: ATI to provide specs (was: Re: SMedia 3362)
Dnia poniedziałek, 10 września 2007, Shawn Rutledge napisał: > On 9/10/07, Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I didn't understand before that it would end up being 100% open > source. I thought you had to sign an NDA? But if the driver is to be > completely open, and the documents are to be completely open too, what > is the purpose of the NDA? Or maybe I just misunderstood completely. NDA can give all available documentation on which OpenMoko team will base open docs which will describe only those parts which vendor allows. As result community will get source code of drivers + documentation for chipset and OpenMoko team will know more about chipset internals then it is needed for writing drivers so if community will get problems with own code then there will be someone who can check does something more should be provided (and was not possible before). -- JID: hrw-jabber.org OpenEmbedded developer/consultant Someday I'm gonna die but it won't be from boredom [Pink] ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: ATI to provide specs (was: Re: SMedia 3362)
On 9/10/07, Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > guys, as I indicated before, we already have the best possible support > from Smedia. Not only have we some promises or statements, but we > actually have signed a contract with them, binding them to support us > to the utmost level. > > As indicated previously, this agreement includes a statement that > OpenMoko will work on to-be-publicized documentation on the SMedia chip, > which will be jointly released at some point. > > So what exactly is not enough? You will get 100% free software drivers, > down to the latest bit, no proprietary firmware whatsoever, plus > hardware documentation that will be prepared by OpenMoko ? I didn't understand before that it would end up being 100% open source. I thought you had to sign an NDA? But if the driver is to be completely open, and the documents are to be completely open too, what is the purpose of the NDA? Or maybe I just misunderstood completely. Anyway it sounds like the best choice in that you do not get anywhere near this kind of support from the others. > device that does not have any working driver at all, but with a > thousand-page manual (rather than the other way around: first have FOSS > Drivers, and then get the docs as soon as our incredibly small team > finds time to do so)? No, getting it working is the more important of the two, of course. But as someone else pointed out, maybe there is the possibility that someone outside your small team could help, if the NDA doesn't prevent it. What kind of driver are you planning on? (I don't think I saw that answered yet, sorry if I missed it) KDrive, DRI, etc... > Do you think we would be foolish enough not to talk to all vendors of > the respective components? I really feel personally very sad that > anyone believes that I am in this project for anything else then to > provide the highest level of freedom for both hardware and software that > is possible. Well the choices for open hardware are always slim, so far. I just thought some people might be putting more emphasis on OpenGL ES support than openness. But it sounds like you have really made the best choice. ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: ATI to provide specs (was: Re: SMedia 3362)
On 9/10/07, Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 10:23:26AM -0700, Shawn Rutledge wrote: > > On 9/6/07, Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > It may be worth talking with ATI again. Since this announcement, I > > > don't think it is too far fetched to at least get the same deal you > > > currently have with SMedia. I wouldn't be surprised if the people you > > > were talking to had no idea this sort of thing was being planned. ATI > > > may even allow the release documentation at some point in the future. > > > > Or just use it for leverage to get more from SMedia. > > guys, as I indicated before, we already have the best possible support > from Smedia. Not only have we some promises or statements, but we > actually have signed a contract with them, binding them to support us > to the utmost level. This is excellent! As indicated previously, this agreement includes a statement that > OpenMoko will work on to-be-publicized documentation on the SMedia chip, > which will be jointly released at some point. First, I believe we need a working implementation, then a (very) rough draft of the docs released in the near future for the community. The docs don't have to be "stable" per se, if we can gain access sooner. But this all depends on the agreement between OM/SMedia. SMedia, I give you guys a lot of credit for taking a stand and provding open documentation. So what exactly is not enough? You will get 100% free software drivers, > down to the latest bit, no proprietary firmware whatsoever, plus > hardware documentation that will be prepared by OpenMoko ? did I... read that correctly? :) Which part exactly are you missing? That there are no docs now? Well, > there is no GTA02 hardware being shipped now either! And if the > community rather wants us to finish the documentation first, and then > write the driver: Please let us know. Do you really prefer to get a > device that does not have any working driver at all, but with a > thousand-page manual (rather than the other way around: first have FOSS > Drivers, and then get the docs as soon as our incredibly small team > finds time to do so)? I think the best scenario would be to get the (simple/barebones?) driver/framework done, and release alpha docs if the situation allows. Wrt: ATI/AMD Imageon: > > ATI's mobile processor diivsion is completely independent from their > desktop graphics. It has totally different architecture, and the recent > announcement by their desktop group doesn't have any maning about the > mobile group. > > Also, ATI's mobile graphics are entirely focused on 2d and codec, plus > they are 100% firmware based. So that means no 3D acceleration, and > even if somebody ever was to write FOSS drivers, lots of code is hidden > in the GPU firmware, rather than in those FOSS drivers. > > What I personally don't understand about this entire debate on our > community list: You have very prominent people of the FOSS movement, > particularly the Linux community in this project. Notably Werner and > myself. Given my track history of clinging to every last word of the > GPL, and my stance with regard to binary-only drivers or other > abominations of the hardware industry: Why don't you trust us to do > proper research and chose the vendor that works best for us, given all > the circumstances? I think we all don't want to see this little FOSS flame be extinguished, and that may have a lot to do with why the OM community is so concerned with all the details, down to the vendors. We should probably take a step back and let OM handle those details. There is a line where the community should end and OpenMoko begin. This (now unknown) line will need tweaking. I place a large amount of trust in the OM Team, as they are geeks just like us. For those in the community unfamiliar with the "very prominent people" within OM, google some of their names; you might be surprised. :) Do you think we would be foolish enough not to talk to all vendors of > the respective components? I really feel personally very sad that > anyone believes that I am in this project for anything else then to > provide the highest level of freedom for both hardware and software that > is possible. > > In GTA01, the only freedom related issue that we have is the Global > Locate (now Broadcom). Given the start of OpenMoko (alternative > software for a Windows smartphone that FIC was building) we didn't have > any influence on that one. We have been trying hard to achieve a > compromise with GL on the level of freedom that they're willing to > provide. Unfortunately that compromise falls short of what many people > in the FOSS community, including myself, deem acceptable. > > For GTA02, we evaluated all different A-GPS solutions on the market, and > we took two of those actually in production. The graphics chip we ship > will have FOSS drivers. We're working with NXP on publishing an open > user manual for the P
Re: ATI to provide specs (was: Re: SMedia 3362)
On Monday 10 September 2007 09:20:54 Harald Welte wrote: > So what exactly is not enough? You will get 100% free software drivers, > down to the latest bit, no proprietary firmware whatsoever, plus > hardware documentation that will be prepared by OpenMoko ? > > Which part exactly are you missing? Some people seem to bemoan the lack of h.264 decoding. Personally, I'm not very fussed about it (watching video on 2.8" isn't much fun in my view)... Personally I far prefer true open source drivers to binary only that will have one more feature but then stop working at will (which occurs rather frequently with the currently shipping ATI fglrx drivers, BTW). signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: ATI to provide specs (was: Re: SMedia 3362)
ma, 2007-09-10 kello 15:20 +0800, Harald Welte kirjoitti: > guys, as I indicated before, we already have the best possible support > from Smedia. Not only have we some promises or statements, but we > actually have signed a contract with them, binding them to support us > to the utmost level. > > As indicated previously, this agreement includes a statement that > OpenMoko will work on to-be-publicized documentation on the SMedia chip, > which will be jointly released at some point. This to-be-publicized documentation bit is something that I at least haven't noticed anywhere yet, and makes the deal better than I thought (and note that I've been pro-SMedia choice already, as long as you get to publish free drivers). I (as I think probably many others who've commented on the suboptimality of the deal) thought the free drivers would have to speak for themselves as for documentation to the wider audience. > Do you really prefer to get a device that does not have any working > driver at all, but with a thousand-page manual (rather than the other > way around: first have FOSS Drivers, and then get the docs as soon as > our incredibly small team finds time to do so)? Please do the driver first :] As said, I suspect people at this point just didn't know/realize that docs _are_ in the pipeline as well. > What I personally don't understand about this entire debate on our > community list: You have very prominent people of the FOSS movement, > particularly the Linux community in this project. Notably Werner and > myself. Given my track history of clinging to every last word of the > GPL, and my stance with regard to binary-only drivers or other > abominations of the hardware industry: Why don't you trust us to do > proper research and chose the vendor that works best for us, given all > the circumstances? Indeed, I can sympathize with this point. I think you're trustworthy guys especially as to providing the most freedom that you can, and I can see how it can become frustrating that every call you make is heavily questioned - from that spesific viewpoint where you should by all rights have the most credibility! So, please, members of the community, have a little confidence in the OM team. > In GTA01, the only freedom related issue that we have is the Global > Locate (now Broadcom). Given the start of OpenMoko (alternative > software for a Windows smartphone that FIC was building) we didn't have > any influence on that one. Good that you mentioned this, because I think this bit likely hasn't gotten the most publicity either. > Starting with GTA02, we have a very firm openness policy for all our > hardware components. Our future designs will follow the same line - and > we're trying to continuously to push the borders any further. We make > our position at chip manufacturers very clear. And we're having very > fruitful discussions and results that I am proud of. And well you should. -- Mikko Rauhala - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.iki.fi/mjr/> Transhumanist - WTA member - http://www.transhumanism.org/> Singularitarian - SIAI supporter - http://www.singinst.org/> ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: ATI to provide specs (was: Re: SMedia 3362)
On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 10:23:26AM -0700, Shawn Rutledge wrote: > On 9/6/07, Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It may be worth talking with ATI again. Since this announcement, I > > don't think it is too far fetched to at least get the same deal you > > currently have with SMedia. I wouldn't be surprised if the people you > > were talking to had no idea this sort of thing was being planned. ATI > > may even allow the release documentation at some point in the future. > > Or just use it for leverage to get more from SMedia. guys, as I indicated before, we already have the best possible support from Smedia. Not only have we some promises or statements, but we actually have signed a contract with them, binding them to support us to the utmost level. As indicated previously, this agreement includes a statement that OpenMoko will work on to-be-publicized documentation on the SMedia chip, which will be jointly released at some point. So what exactly is not enough? You will get 100% free software drivers, down to the latest bit, no proprietary firmware whatsoever, plus hardware documentation that will be prepared by OpenMoko ? Which part exactly are you missing? That there are no docs now? Well, there is no GTA02 hardware being shipped now either! And if the community rather wants us to finish the documentation first, and then write the driver: Please let us know. Do you really prefer to get a device that does not have any working driver at all, but with a thousand-page manual (rather than the other way around: first have FOSS Drivers, and then get the docs as soon as our incredibly small team finds time to do so)? Wrt: ATI/AMD Imageon: ATI's mobile processor diivsion is completely independent from their desktop graphics. It has totally different architecture, and the recent announcement by their desktop group doesn't have any maning about the mobile group. Also, ATI's mobile graphics are entirely focused on 2d and codec, plus they are 100% firmware based. So that means no 3D acceleration, and even if somebody ever was to write FOSS drivers, lots of code is hidden in the GPU firmware, rather than in those FOSS drivers. What I personally don't understand about this entire debate on our community list: You have very prominent people of the FOSS movement, particularly the Linux community in this project. Notably Werner and myself. Given my track history of clinging to every last word of the GPL, and my stance with regard to binary-only drivers or other abominations of the hardware industry: Why don't you trust us to do proper research and chose the vendor that works best for us, given all the circumstances? Do you think we would be foolish enough not to talk to all vendors of the respective components? I really feel personally very sad that anyone believes that I am in this project for anything else then to provide the highest level of freedom for both hardware and software that is possible. In GTA01, the only freedom related issue that we have is the Global Locate (now Broadcom). Given the start of OpenMoko (alternative software for a Windows smartphone that FIC was building) we didn't have any influence on that one. We have been trying hard to achieve a compromise with GL on the level of freedom that they're willing to provide. Unfortunately that compromise falls short of what many people in the FOSS community, including myself, deem acceptable. For GTA02, we evaluated all different A-GPS solutions on the market, and we took two of those actually in production. The graphics chip we ship will have FOSS drivers. We're working with NXP on publishing an open user manual for the PCF50633 PMU, and we already have their approval for it. We're staying with the publicly documented samsung s3c24xx CPU series. We use accelerometers with publicly available data sheets. We use a bluetooth chip with open data sheet. We use a WiFi module with GPL licensed free software driver. There is no other hardware vendor of devices with similar high level of integration that has taken openness to the degree that we are taking it. Starting with GTA02, we have a very firm openness policy for all our hardware components. Our future designs will follow the same line - and we're trying to continuously to push the borders any further. We make our position at chip manufacturers very clear. And we're having very fruitful discussions and results that I am proud of. -- - Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://openmoko.org/ Software for the world's first truly open Free Software mobile phone ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: ATI to provide specs (was: Re: SMedia 3362)
On 9/6/07, Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It may be worth talking with ATI again. Since this announcement, I > don't think it is too far fetched to at least get the same deal you > currently have with SMedia. I wouldn't be surprised if the people you > were talking to had no idea this sort of thing was being planned. ATI > may even allow the release documentation at some point in the future. Or just use it for leverage to get more from SMedia. ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
ATI to provide specs (was: Re: SMedia 3362)
Harald Welte wrote: > On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 05:19:22PM +0100, Giles Jones wrote: >> On 1 Sep 2007, at 17:11, Mikko Rauhala wrote: >>> You're implying there are better choices... >> I wouldn't know since I've not looked into such things. But ATI have mobile >> GPUs and are open sourcing desktop drivers, maybe they would do the same >> for their mobile devices? > > Why do you think we have spent many weeks, if not months to meet with > each and every graphics chip vendor? We're not that stupid, eh. > > It was a very painful and long process to finally find one company that > was not fundamentally opposed to free software drivers. one in the > entire industry. I sympathize with you. I'm tired of finding no datasheets or worse, the 1 page "datasheet" when I go to look at potential components. I wonder how many sales these companies have lost because someone couldn't even tell what their component does? The point of this post is to bring attention to the news that ATI/AMD appears to be planning to actually release documentation, at least for their desktop chips anyway. I've heard rumblings about this sort of thing in the past, and always thought: "Yeah right, I'll believe it when I see it." But it appears to actually be happening, open source 2D drivers from ATI by the end of the year with documentation for the community to write 3D drivers to follow. It may be worth talking with ATI again. Since this announcement, I don't think it is too far fetched to at least get the same deal you currently have with SMedia. I wouldn't be surprised if the people you were talking to had no idea this sort of thing was being planned. ATI may even allow the release documentation at some point in the future. I realize you are probably already aware of this, and that it is much to late to show up in the GTA02, I just wanted to make sure you knew about it. (and I'd love to hear about it if its on the mysterious road map) Some links: (in no particular order) Ars Technica: http://arstechnica.com/journals/linux.ars/2007/09/05/amd-to-deliver-better-ati-drivers-open-specifications Beyon3d: http://www.beyond3d.com/content/news/458 ZDNet: http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-6206581.html CNet: http://news.com.com/8301-13580_3-9772788-39.html Google news search: http://news.google.com/news?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=s&hl=en&tab=wn&ie=ISO-8859-1&ncl=1120354742 ATI's phone processor page: http://ati.amd.com/products/handheld.html -Steve ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
