RaspberryPi's BCM2835 now has Open Source drivers - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Stephen Hill
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2012, 02:30:52 pm
content: http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/2221I think this is fantastic news and quite unexpected. I hope a few other ARM vendors do the same.

author: peter.mitchell
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2012, 02:41:13 pm
content: *cough* nVidia *cough*

author: Stephen Hill
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2012, 02:53:30 pm
content: Quote from: peter.mitchell on October 24, 2012, 02:41:13 pmI don't care about nVidia. I'm an ATI(AMD) man all the way

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2012, 03:22:31 pm
content: Or Intel, if you don't care about gaming.Confession - I have an NVidia GPU in my desktop PC, but it runs Windows (as if that makes it any better!)

author: bingo600
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2012, 06:37:04 pm
content: The drivers aren't opensourced according to the comments herehttp://hackaday.com/2012/10/24/rasperry-pi-now-mostly-open-source/Just the interface , to the still closed drivers./Bingo

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2012, 07:04:59 pm
content: Yep.If only intel would start pushing out those little boards with intel cpus and intel graphics...

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2012, 07:22:48 pm
content: Apparently, the microcode isn't open. But this isn't a big deal - that's the internal logic for controlling what parts of the GPU to use and is downloaded when the device powers up. Every major GPU and many CPUs use microcode... What broadcom have given is essentially an open driver - which addresses the registers directly. Good enough for now. People can work on using their own microcode later.

author: andersm
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2012, 10:46:42 pm
content: The released source code is useless for the things it's been asked for, ie. fixing bugs and adding features. What they've released is just a interface that sends high-level commands to the actual binary-only graphics stack.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2012, 10:52:20 pm
content: I looked at it more closely, and you may be right. I initially thought RPC_CALL etc might be addressing registers, but clearly it stands for "remote procedure call", in other words, just calls the blob.

author: RCMR
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2012, 10:52:35 pm
content: Quote from: andersm on October 24, 2012, 10:46:42 pmBut that's better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick -- no?

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2012, 11:01:08 pm
content: No, itisa poke in the eye.

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2012, 05:40:16 am
content: At first I was thinking "next BCM should release the datasheet" but upon inspection of the code, it's quite clear that there isn't much of a driver there, and as others have said it's a bunch of interface code that could've easily been RE'd.The ones RE'ing the driver have made quite a bit of progress, and come up with documentation too. I'll take documentation over source code any day. Intel has been quite good with this lately.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 12:58:00 am
content: How many "open source" devices have something in them that is not open source? Technically, anything that has a chip in it cannot be fully open source since there isn't a chip out there (that I'm aware of) that's open source. If you disregard the openness of the hardware, would a device containing binary firmware in a ROM be disqualified from being fully open source?From my understanding, the Raspberry Pi graphics driver is fully open on the CPU side, but the GPU has a binary firmware that does the real work. It's really no different from all the WiFi cards out there.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 02:32:45 am
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on October 26, 2012, 12:58:00 amUltraSPARC T1, off the top of my head..QuoteAnd the internals of every single Android phone out there. But some people like to have a good whine.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 05:30:48 am
content: It's not about the chip itself being "open source" (although there are some) it's about the goddamn thing beingdocumentedwell enough the open source community can support it - because proprietary blobs inevitably suck and are impossible to repair.

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 06:41:02 am
content: Quote from: Monkeh on October 26, 2012, 02:32:45 amFrom what I've seen the issue mainly isn't with how open (or not) it is, but the exaggeration of openness the foundation has been doing. Android phone manufacturers don't say how very open their hardware is.Quote from: poptonesExactly. TI's OMAP35x processor reference manual is an excellent example of documentation done right. Description of probably everything there is on the chip in nearly 3500 pages

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 04:20:21 pm
content: the reason that pi thing is never going to be open is that it has a HDMI interface. That system contains crypto technology and requires NDA and licencing fees.The binary blob disables access to the crypto block so you cannot bypass it to play encrypted streams. The entire access to that system is shielded and obfuscated. They simply can't make it open source because the HDMI rights holders lawyers ( Silicon Image ) would have a field day. So its API only. The guts are and will remain binary.As it is open sauce and there is no 'central point of contact' there is also nobody to cough up the dough for the royalties or signing the NDA. Besides signing an NDA by 10 million developers is kinda moot... do not disclose but we'll have everyone sign it, just can;t talk about it outside the community ... duh !Besides that, this chip contains other proprietary technolgoy that requires further NDA's.That is the problem with big complex SOC's. they invariably contain IP that needs to be licenced unless explicitly made open at conception.There my even be block in there that Broadcomm themselves licenced from a source and they cannot sublicence .. only distribute binary or object code access.