Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1624728

Re: [PATCH 00/16] Intel FPGA Device Drivers

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 10:35:01AM -0500, Alan Tull wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 3:49 PM, Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jerome,
> 
> > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 12:48:17PM -0700, Luebbers, Enno wrote:
> >> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:37:49AM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 07:46:19AM -0700, Moritz Fischer wrote:
> >> > > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 6:29 AM, Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > It is like if on GPU we only had close source compiler for the GPU
> >> > > > instructions set. So FPGA is definitly following different rules than
> >> > > > open source upstream GPU kernel driver abides to.
> 
> Sorry, not a GPU guy, can you point me to something that documents
> this policy of 'only opensource compilers for GPU'?  I looked under
> linux/Documentation and didn't see anything.

https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2010-July/001828.html

There is no explicit mention about compiler but trust me it is included
in everyones mind. You can ask Dave i am sure he would reject a driver
with everything open except the shader compiler.


> The current patchset doesn't have anything to do with FPGA toolchains
> but you're using this patchset as a platform to talk about toolchain
> issues.

Well Intel inclusion of FPGA triggered my curiosity and when that patchset
came accross my inbox i did wonder where the open source userspace was and
went looking for it to no avail. So this isn't against a specific patchset
but more broadly against the whole drivers/fpga/ story. Sorry if this was
not clear.


> It sounds like you are opposed to any kernel support of loading images
> on FPGAs until all vendors have opensource toolchains.

Yes that is what i am saying. They are different standard in the kernel
and i would rather have one clear standard about driver needing proper
open source userspace to go along with any upstream driver.

Beside when it comes to FPGA i am still puzzle on why no one release info
on the bitstream. They all provide details documentation on the internal
(LUT, flip-flop, logic block layout and connection, memory block, ...).
So there is nothing hidden in the bitstream. I am guessing the only good
reason i can think of is to make it harder to map a bitstream back to
VHDL/Verilog/...

Cheers,
Jérôme

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: [PATCH 00/16] Intel FPGA Device Drivers "Luebbers, Enno" <enno.luebbers@intel.com> - 2017-04-11 21:40 +0200
  Re: [PATCH 00/16] Intel FPGA Device Drivers Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> - 2017-04-12 15:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 00/16] Intel FPGA Device Drivers Moritz Fischer <moritz.fischer@ettus.com> - 2017-04-12 16:50 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 00/16] Intel FPGA Device Drivers Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> - 2017-04-12 17:40 +0200
        Re: [PATCH 00/16] Intel FPGA Device Drivers "Luebbers, Enno" <enno.luebbers@intel.com> - 2017-04-14 21:50 +0200
          Re: [PATCH 00/16] Intel FPGA Device Drivers Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> - 2017-04-14 23:00 +0200
            Re: [PATCH 00/16] Intel FPGA Device Drivers Alan Tull <atull@kernel.org> - 2017-04-17 17:40 +0200
              Re: [PATCH 00/16] Intel FPGA Device Drivers Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> - 2017-04-17 18:00 +0200
                Re: [PATCH 00/16] Intel FPGA Device Drivers Alan Tull <atull@kernel.org> - 2017-04-17 18:30 +0200
                Re: [PATCH 00/16] Intel FPGA Device Drivers Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> - 2017-04-17 19:20 +0200
                Re: [PATCH 00/16] Intel FPGA Device Drivers Alan Cox <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> - 2017-04-18 16:30 +0200
                Re: [PATCH 00/16] Intel FPGA Device Drivers Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> - 2017-04-18 17:00 +0200

csiph-web