Messages in this thread | | | From | "Helge Hafting" <> | Date | Fri, 18 Sep 1998 14:50:19 +0100 | Subject | Re: Linux Kernel Wish-List |
| |
In <Pine.LNX.3.95.980918201950.408E-100000@deathstar.healey.com.au>, on 09/18/98 at 08:23 PM, Benjamin Grosman <bgrosman@healey.com.au> said:
>Hello All,
>The Linux Kernel Wish List contains the following item:
>Java or Forth interpreter in kernel for device drivers. This lets vendors >write binary drivers that will work for Intel, Alpha, and whatever else >uses the same bus. An interpreted driver without source code is better >than no driver at all.
>A few questions on this then:
>1) Is this a serious wish? Depends on who wrote it. I think interpreters are too slow for this purpose. A hopelessly slow cpu-killing device is worse than no device at all, considering the fact that good drivers exist for plenty of devices already.
Vendors can write drivers in C for Intel, Alpha, and whatever already. A interpreted language isn't necessary, because compiled C is supported on all platforms. It is fast and doesn't need an emulator. The vendor may release the source, or distribute binary modules (compiled driver files) if the source contains trade secrets. Its the vendors choice, and we can get a driver either way.
I believe releasing driver source will become more common as devices get more complicated. This because the performance (and trade secrets) will be in the complex device electronics, not in cleverly written driver code. So it won't matter if competitors copy code when they can't copy the chip.
Helge Hafting -- ----------------------------------------------------------- helge.hafting@daldata.no -----------------------------------------------------------
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |