Re:Cybercriminals who breached Nvidia issue one of the most ...
by NavinF on Friday March 04, 2022 @08:54AM
(#30554722)
Did you leave power savings enabled? Cause that’s a recipe for disaster on Linux. My ML servers have years of uptime with “nvidia-smi -pm 0” in crontab and auto updates disabled. The latter prevents the CUDA version from getting ahead of the kernel module version.
It’s a polished turd, but at least it works which is more than I can say for nouveau
And yes you can distribute patches. Copyright only prevents you from distributing the modified version.
Re:Cybercriminals who breached Nvidia issue one of the most ...
by pabs3 on Friday March 04, 2022 @05:48PM
(#30561665)
This was like 15 years ago (no idea about power savings stuff), I wouldn't touch the proprietary driver any more though.
nouveau has been extremely stable for me when I used it up until last year.
Patches contain parts of the original code, so I would class them as modified versions of the original code. Also the initial modification isn't allowed either, I wasn't really referring to distribution of the patches, just creating them isn't allowed AFAIK.
Re:Cybercriminals who breached Nvidia issue one of the most ...
by NavinF on Saturday March 05, 2022 @06:41PM
(#30573178)
You’re talking about the EULA, not the copyright license. The EULA can certainly claim you’re not allowed to do that, but it’s also unenforceable in most places so who cares?
Re:Cybercriminals who breached Nvidia issue one of the most ...
by pabs3 on Saturday March 05, 2022 @07:01PM
(#30573357)
I'm talking about neither the EULA nor the copyright license, but about copyright law, which doesn't allow modifications by default. Only a EULA or other license can then allow modifications.
OTOH, even the GPL is pretty much unenforceable these days, unless you are well funded enough to afford time consuming legal cases.
I don't think you can distribute patches against proprietary source-available drivers, since modifying proprietary code is against copyright law.