81
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2024
81 points (98.8% liked)
Linux
6208 readers
314 users here now
A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system
Also check out:
Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Likely driver issues, hopefully they can get it fixed!
Intel did a great job with the drivers in windows last time, time will tell if they fix up the Linux ones
Linux doesn't have drivers. Support for the GPU is baked into the kernel.
Yes and those kernel modules that get loaded in to control hardware interfaces are often referred to as drivers.
Those can't really be updated independently of the kernel so they are effectively baked it.
Also the modules are dependent on how it is compiled you can include them in the kernel binary or you can have them separate.
…….. what are you talking about?
The new modules can absolutely be updated independently of the kernel.
The modules need to be built against your version of the kernel, but MANY versions of the modules work (and are compiled against) different kernel versions.
Just look at nvidia, a nearly duplicate version of this exact problem. They have MANY versions you can install at any given time for their cards.
But also, fundamentally... Those modules are the device drivers, regardless of whether they're separable from the kernel. That's part of why they're organised under the drivers directory in the kernel source tree.
Intel refers to them as drivers.
I was once trained to consider drivers and modules the same thing, but there appears to be a distinguishing difference.
https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/47208/what-is-the-difference-between-kernel-drivers-and-kernel-modules
Most kernel level drivers are modules (though they don't have to be compiled that way), but many modules are things other than drivers.
That's accurate to the second link.
Those kernel modules are the drivers.