Linux graphics, why sharing code with Windows isn't always a win.


A recent article on phoronix has some commentary about sharing code between Windows and Linux, and how this seems to be a metric that Intel likes.
I'd like to explore this idea a bit and explain why I believe it's bad for Linux based distros and our open source development models in the graphics area.
tl;dr there is a big difference between open source released and open source developed projects in terms of sustainability and community.
The Linux graphics stack from a distro vendor point of view is made up of two main projects, the Linux kernel and Mesa userspace. These two projects are developed in the open with completely open source vendor agnostic practices. There is no vendor controlling either project and both projects have a goal of try to maximise shared code and shared processes/coding standards across drivers from all vendors.
This cross-vendor synergy is very important to the functioning ecosystem that is the Linux graphics stack. The stack also relies in some places on the LLVM project, but again LLVM upstream is vendor agnostic and open source developed.
The value to distros is they have central places to pick up driver stacks with good release cycles and a minimal number of places they have to deal with to interact with those communities. Now usually hardware vendors don't see the value in the external communities as much as Linux distros do. From a hardware vendor internal point of view they see more benefit in creating a single stack shared between their Windows and Linux to maximise their return on investment, or make their orgchart prettier or produce less powerpoints about why their orgchart isn't optimal.
A shared Windows/Linux stack as such is a thing the vendors want more for their own reasons than for the benefit of the Linux community.
Why is it a bad idea?
I'll start by saying it's not always a bad idea. In theory it might be possible to produce such a stack with the benefits of open source development model, however most vendors seem to fail at this. They see open source as a release model, they develop internally and shovel the results over the fence into a github repo every X weeks after a bunch of cycles. They build products containing these open source pieces, but they never expend the time building projects or communities around them.
[...]
A warning then to anyone wishing for more vendor code sharing between OSes it generally doesn't end with Linux being better off, it ends up with Linux being more fragmented, harder to support and in the long run unsustainable.
-

- Login or register to post comments
Printer-friendly version- 4717 reads
PDF version
More in Tux Machines
- Highlights
- Front Page
- Latest Headlines
- Archive
- Recent comments
- All-Time Popular Stories
- Hot Topics
- New Members
digiKam 7.7.0 is released
After three months of active maintenance and another bug triage, the digiKam team is proud to present version 7.7.0 of its open source digital photo manager. See below the list of most important features coming with this release.
|
Dilution and Misuse of the "Linux" Brand
|
Samsung, Red Hat to Work on Linux Drivers for Future Tech
The metaverse is expected to uproot system design as we know it, and Samsung is one of many hardware vendors re-imagining data center infrastructure in preparation for a parallel 3D world.
Samsung is working on new memory technologies that provide faster bandwidth inside hardware for data to travel between CPUs, storage and other computing resources. The company also announced it was partnering with Red Hat to ensure these technologies have Linux compatibility.
|
today's howtos
|








.svg_.png)
Content (where original) is available under CC-BY-SA, copyrighted by original author/s.

Context to this
Intel's Graphics Driver Now Sharing ~60% Codebase Between Windows/Linux, 90~100% The Performance
Airlie: "Why Sharing Code With Windows Isn't Always A Win"
Airlie: "Why Sharing Code With Windows Isn't Always A Win"