The drivers for ARM device is a mess and it's always out of tree. We can do nothing to change that because they won't release them into mainline. But in some cases the OEM might have violated the GPL but no one is sueing them.
What we can do is to create a stable abi like Google's GKI does so that an OS can be run without considering what's beneath, but that does the same as Android. Why bother? Why don't we just customize Android interface to make it looks different instead and let Google handles the rest ?
Yes, I meant to be the opinion of the phone manufacturers. But for the third-party programmers, we still couldn't do anything when the drivers are not upstreamed
This was also the case with PC, Linux community did develop drivers independently and I think once the movement will have some action, everything will fall in place.
I think the major obstacles are on the OEM side. On amd64 or i386, the details of the hardware are actually disclosed. However, due to how it is working on arm devices, I don't think the hardware details could be revealed other than being released by OEM itself. e.g. SONY does that.
Well, it is quite hard for third-party developer to figure out how to work with the driver because of the large number of handsets available around the market and each variant has it's own drivers even if they are being powered by the same SoC. Those drivers are just out of tree and too hard to be put back into mainline without efforts.
They won't release the code because they don't think it's profitable. When people could update their devices and keep them longer, manufacturers will have a reduction on sales on their phones. It's all about money.
Yes, but even if they have common specs, the source code are still varies because they are being modified by "Google first, then SoC OEM, then manufacturer" stack.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
The drivers for ARM device is a mess and it's always out of tree. We can do nothing to change that because they won't release them into mainline. But in some cases the OEM might have violated the GPL but no one is sueing them.
What we can do is to create a stable abi like Google's GKI does so that an OS can be run without considering what's beneath, but that does the same as Android. Why bother? Why don't we just customize Android interface to make it looks different instead and let Google handles the rest ?
Letting Google handle the rest is a big problem.
Yes, I meant to be the opinion of the phone manufacturers. But for the third-party programmers, we still couldn't do anything when the drivers are not upstreamed
This was also the case with PC, Linux community did develop drivers independently and I think once the movement will have some action, everything will fall in place.
I think the major obstacles are on the OEM side. On amd64 or i386, the details of the hardware are actually disclosed. However, due to how it is working on arm devices, I don't think the hardware details could be revealed other than being released by OEM itself. e.g. SONY does that.
Hmm but would it be that hard to monitor how it operates and figure out drivers?
Also once there is momentum, OEMs might release drivers if they see the scope. Currently they aren’t doing just because there is no action.
There are many website where ARM specs are made open by individual contributors.
Well, it is quite hard for third-party developer to figure out how to work with the driver because of the large number of handsets available around the market and each variant has it's own drivers even if they are being powered by the same SoC. Those drivers are just out of tree and too hard to be put back into mainline without efforts.
They won't release the code because they don't think it's profitable. When people could update their devices and keep them longer, manufacturers will have a reduction on sales on their phones. It's all about money.
Yes, but even if they have common specs, the source code are still varies because they are being modified by "Google first, then SoC OEM, then manufacturer" stack.