NVIDIA's Proprietary Linux Driver Adds Support For Wayland, Mir (phoronix.com) 83
An anonymous reader writes: After being desired by NVIDIA Linux users for years, the proprietary GeForce graphics driver natively supports Wayland and Mir as an alternative to an X.Org Server. It's been a long time coming for the proprietary GPU driver stacks to support Wayland/Mir, but with today's 364.12 beta driver there is now the necessary DRM KMS kernel support and EGL extensions for being able to handle these next-generation display solutions. The new NVIDIA Linux driver also provides integrated Vulkan support, PRIME rendering support, and other additions.
Can't wait to see the performance comparisons (Score:1)
Might be about time to move the gaming rig over to SteamOS.
Re: (Score:1)
Might be about time to move the gaming rig over to SteamOS.
So far the performance has been quite a bit worse on SteamOS than on Windows. I don't see why this update would change that. So far Vulkan has performed worse than DirectX too but I assume that will change with new games/engine versions by competent developers.
Re:Can't wait to see the performance comparisons (Score:4, Informative)
While a popular point of rhetoric, there exists ZERO evidence SteamOS (Linux) is slower than Windows. For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rISRVeJxhnE Very improperly, most people and articles are attributing poor performance to SteamOS when the real issue is sub-par ports of applications. Also note in the video you can observe a couple of glitches (texture loading) in the Window's demo whereas it's silky smooth on Linux ( - which is believed to be superior Linux file caching).
To be clear, not that I'm ignoring your last sentence, but your first two sentences are misleading; though I don't believe that's intentional. If a game's performance is lackluster, you can completely blame the game developer as it has absolutely nothing to do with SteamOS. SteamOS has all of the foundations to provide FASTER performance than Windows. There exists no evidence to substantiate a claim that SteamOS is slower than Windows and all evidence points to platform performance deltas being that of lazy ports and developers who lack platform knowledge to optimize for Linux as they have done for Windows. Hell, once again we have games running under Wine which are starting to outperform native Windows. Which is pretty profound when you consider they are frequently doing DX to OpenGL translations to boot. Meaning they are faster even with an additional abstraction layer. Bluntly, there is every evidence that SteamOS/Linux (with NVIDIA anyways) is faster than Windows and where applications falter, you can squarely blame the developers.
Additionally, the Vulkan comment is not true. So far, developers who are learning to use a new API, without redesigning to properly leverage Vulkan, and running on beta drivers, have performed worse than DirectX; which is a highly optimized and well understood framework. Furthermore, there are specific guideline recommendations for when Vulkan should be used and when it's possible to provide ideal performance. The current use cases are not even known if these satisfy the recommendations. As such, the examples people commonly use may not even represent ideal candidates for the newer DX12/Vulkan APIs.
In summary, while you have accurately parroted the rhetoric and FUD, it is not supported by any available evidence. That said, I believe the spirit of your comment can be accurately rephrased to say: Many games running on SteamOS have lackluster performance because developers have failed to optimized their games for the new platform (OpenGL vs DX9, DX10, DX11). As such, many games will run slower on SteamOS than Windows, through no fault of SteamOS. This is a subtle yet profoundly important distinction. And it's a distinction which is directly contrary to the common FUD.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Arma 3 Bechmark results:
https://i.imgur.com/UfpUI5p.png
https://i.imgur.com/ypWsvqz.png
https://i.imgur.com/haTiRLZ.png
Worth noting, the port was achieved using a DX wrapper which converts DX calls into OpenGL. With an extra abstraction layer, it's still performing on par or better than Windows.
Re: (Score:2)
Mod UP +1 and Thank you for these informative posts.
I am going to load up Linux on my desktop tonight and see how it goes. Going use a separate drive just in case though. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I don't really get the need for the attitude, if there existed zero evidence for it then I wouldn't mention it, however as you said in my case "don't believe that's intentional" maybe the same can be said about the harshness in your comment. But I assume it was, but you kinda covered it up by kinda stating being too harsh may not be valid because my "lies" wasn't intentional so whatever.
Over to the posts.
The stuff I've seen HAS BEEN lower performance on SteamOS. As for WHY that's is the case I don't really
Re: (Score:2)
More Wayland & Vulkan: GOOD (Score:2)
Thank you Nvidia. It's about time that there was a broader support base for Wayland, and the launch-day support of Vulkan on Linux has been quite positive too.
Re: (Score:1)
"It's about time that there was a broader support base for Wayland"
Why? What exactly does Wayland bring to the table that X doesn't? I can think of a few things vice versa.
Re: (Score:2)
In 99% of cases X is using a remote framebuffer scheme as well, it just does so in a way that most people don't know it's happening.
This lie again? (Score:2)
The lie is based on how the current version of GTK is designed to rely on fast local graphics hardware and does not support being displayed remotely so X gets the job done with a fallback. The fuckup is in GTK not X.
Re: (Score:2)
I married a mutant werewolf 386, you insensitive clod!
Re:More Wayland & Vulkan: GOOD (Score:4, Insightful)
> Network transparency is also a pretty narrow edge case. There hundreds of millions of remote screen devices and deployments today
It makes for a better argument if you don't immediately contradict yourself.
Also, conflating RDP and VNC is just moronic. Microsoft has made RDP a worthy offering. VNC is just a nightmare and the prime example of why you don't want to treat network transparency as an afterthought.
As bad as X is supposed to be, it's still better than VNC. It's WAY better than VNC. X with a few tweaks is almost on par with RDP (even going across the Internet).
Network transparency is by no means a narrow edge case as the example of RDP demonstrates. It's now a common feature that the vast majority of corporate users take for granted.
It's not 1994 anymore. While you X haters were stuck in your bubble the world moved on.
Re: (Score:2)
By all means try. It might be amusing.
In the meantime, I will be utilizing a remote GUI to get some work done.
Re: (Score:2)
That is not how you use vice versa. You just ruined English and Latin in one go.
That's not how you contribute to the Internet. You've just ruined a post and my time in one go! :)
Re: (Score:2)
What exactly does Wayland bring to the table that X doesn't?
You know every single vitriolic attack that's ever been made against SystemD.... well you could apply pretty much all of them to the X server with the main difference being that with X server they are actually true most of the time, while with SystemD most of the more salacious ones are flat out wrong and are just copy-n-pasted as trolls.
Further, if we were to take a Venn diagram of the subset of people who foam at the mouth with hate about SystemD and the subset of people who foam at the mouth with hate at
Re: (Score:3)
> You know every single vitriolic attack that's ever been made against SystemD...
Except you didn't really answer the question.
If anything, X is much like init. For many of us it "just works" and gets stuff done. It sits quietly in the background and does it's thing. It does not make itself a problem.
"It's icky and crufty" isn't really an answer either for X or init.
It seems like the best thing the Wayland fanboys can say for themselves is that you won't notice the difference. That's if we are exceedingly
Re: (Score:2)
I was also very skeptical about Wayland advantages, esp. as I considered X to be one of most cool features of Linux/Unix systems. But when you take a look to some details, then you see that it is not so cool. When X was designed, it was designed to draw primitives - lines, fonts. And it was not designed to draw bitmaps. In its current usage, it mostly draws bitmaps, i.e. true rendering is done in applications (using libraries like GTK, KDE, Qt...) while X is just slapping it together. And it does it in a ve
Re: (Score:3)
A server dishes out resources. In this case the resource is screen. It's counterintuitive if you think server= compute server, but there are other examples like print server too. It does make sense.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it does make sense, but it is counter-intuitive when you hear that for the first time. Exactly the case you mentioned = compute server runs clients and they attach to the server which is actually my work station. They could have chosen some other wording, no matter that technically X server is indeed a server.
Re: (Score:2)
It is not just counter-intuitive, it is also wrong. The limited resource is not your screen, but your desktop. That may be a small distinction, but it leads to all kinds of problem in X. For example, running multiple screens is still a bit of a faff. And you can run only one window manager.
In a clean architecture, the window manager would be the server, and the screens would be clients.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure many are interested in multiple window managers, but if so then you run multiple X servers or a nested X server.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Never seen that once on Slashdot. Ever.
Seen PLENTY of extremely arrogant and ignorant users with a God complex because they forwarded an xterm once* and decided that all technological progress in graphics must be halted permanently in the name of "network transparency" using one type of rather crufty protocol that performs like absolute shit over any non-LAN connection.
What's e
Re: (Score:2)
any modern graphical application shoved over a network socket in X is *not* network transparent
The death of network transparency has been greatly exaggerated. I can ssh to another machine, start a modern (or old) program and it pops up on my local display. You might not like how the network transparency is implemented, but the claim that it doesn't exist is patently false.
Re: (Score:2)
" You might not like how the network transparency is implemented, "
Yeah, I don't and neither do most people who actually have to do this stuff for something other than toy applications. Speaking of which, why the hell should a separate SSH server & login session be a requirement for secure forwarding of graphical applications? You're own attacks on any progress in technology whatsoever start to ring hollow when you're "perfect" solution includes a built-in kludge that accounts for X's inadequacies.
The
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I don't and neither do most people who actually have to do this stuff for something other than toy applications.
So first you said it doesn't exist, now you say it does but you don't like it. Which is it? Please make up your mind.
Speaking of which, why the hell should a separate SSH server & login session be a requirement for secure forwarding of graphical applications?
Because it works well enough that no one's bothered to implenent a different mechanism? I'm guessing people tend to run X over ssh
Re: (Score:2)
Probably for the same reason when you make a tar file, you use a separate program like bzip or bzip2 to compress. Because that's the type of environment *NIX systems were designed around. A tool does one thing, and does it well, and you combine tools in clever ways to achieve the end result you're looking for. I think dragging X through SSH tunnels is awesome myself. Just goes to show how versatile X is.
Re: (Score:2)
Almost two decades ago, my friends and me ran four instances of Quake, running it via X forwarding from a Linux box to our IRIX workstations. It was playable.
Sadly in a window as those IRIXes had insane (for those times) display resolutions, but it worked well.
Try getting a fluent animation over VNC or similar crap today, on so many orders of magnitude better hardware.
Re: (Score:2)
> X is *not* network transparent but is pushing frame buffers in a massively less efficient way than all the other remote display protocols
You're on crack, or just a clueless idiot that's never actually used this stuff. There seems to be a lot of this going around. People like to copy Apple products without actually having used them.
Case in point: VNC versus X. This is one great example that contradicts your statement. VNC is god awful. It is slow. It's so slow that it doesn't even work well on a Gigabit
Re: (Score:2)
Easiest way to find somebody who has a God complex because he forwarded an xterm once and thinks that everyone else is an idiot: Correctly point out that the modern X server running any real application made this century is no longer network transparent.
Bonus points for the idiots not understanding the fact that the ability to forward a window (poorly) over an X server does *NOT* make the X server "network transparent" because the word "transparent" has a specific technical meaning that the little bot with
Re: (Score:2)
Lucky for you. While you've been asleep we've had to put up with that "X Sux" shit every fucking time Wayland is mentioned.
Re: (Score:1)
-- What exactly does Wayland bring to the table that X doesn't?
Better performance.
Effective remote over high latency.
Reduced cost of support / bugs.
etc...
Re: (Score:2)
I asked you for benchmarks last time and you had nothing to back up that statement. It may be the aim but Wayland is not performing better yet - especially since most of the drivers are cut and pasted from X.
WTF? Remote access is explicitly not supported at all!
Re: (Score:1)
Wayland is using an architecture that has obviously better performance. It is an architecture shared by systems that do outperform X consistently. Whether it does or doesn't have better performance today of 6 months ago is mostly irrelevant. When it is done, if it works, it will have better performance. A highway under construction might only be safe to drive at 5mph. That doesn't mean that eventually it won't allow for much higher speeds than backroads and such a statement is obvious by just looking
Re: (Score:2)
As the benchmarks would show if there were any and you were correct. Reality is that it is a work in progress so still inferior performance, which is expected and not a problem apart from clueless fanboys lying about it when there is no need to do so.
WTF is your problem?
Re: (Score:2)
Just in time for Ubuntu? (Score:3)
Re:Just in time for Ubuntu? (Score:4, Insightful)
Mir is a joke NIH solution to a problem that's already solved with Wayland. And just like all their other NIH solutions to problems they will abandon in a year when it's clear how much it's going to cost them to support it. It's the same story at Canonical over and over again.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Mir exists, in part, because there actually are some real problems with X11, such as the complete lack of anything resembling security on the input path. These problems were not things that the Wayland developers decided to fix.
Compositing window managers intercept nearly everything so that they can re-map events to arbitrarily shaped windows etc. Which security flaws aren't easily fixed by compositing windowmanagers on X?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, Wayland fixes all of this. In fact, this is in part why Mir uses the exact same input library as wayland: libinput.
Responding to my own post because I realized that citation is need:
https://lwn.net/Articles/51737... [lwn.net]
https://blog.martin-graesslin.... [martin-graesslin.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, 'if all goes well, should use Mir by default' has been a missed goal a few times in the past.
Re: (Score:1)
It is not coincidence. It's planning on the part of Canonical and nVidia.
Re: (Score:2)
??? You are switching to the libre driver because of VDPAU? That makes no sense.
Vulkan is the important bit (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Except that Vulkan support isn't news.
Nvidia had Vulkan support for Linux on launch day. The news is the official Wayland support.
VR wayland desktop!!! (Score:1)