Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 10 Dec 2017 15:47:14 -0500
From:      Baho Utot <>
Subject:   Re: CUDA under FreeBSD
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References:  <> <0545699d-9df7-ced2-4990-27e3ecb8e531@ShaneWare.Biz> <> <> <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On 12/10/2017 2:48 PM, JD wrote:
> On 12/09/2017 08:13 PM, Baho Utot wrote:
>> On 12/9/2017 9:45 PM, Jan Beich wrote:
>>> Shane Ambler <FreeBSD@ShaneWare.Biz> writes:
>>>> On 04/12/2017 21:19, wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, December 4, 2017 4:24 am, Carmel NY wrote:
>>>>>> Out of morbid curiosity, I was wondering if anyone could tell me
>>>>>> the real reason that Nvidia does not support CUDA under
>>>>> Arrogance would be my guess.
>>>> The morbid part is that they give us the linux libcuda, so we 
>>>> should be
>>>> able to run linux binaries that use cuda, just not native apps.
>>> Modern CUDA toolkit is 64bit but runtime only works on 32bit (bug 
>>> 206711).
>>> Building as -m32 is probably still possible but may not fit all 
>>> workloads
>>> nor run as fast.
>>>>>> FreeBSD? Also, what are the realistic expectations for it getting
>>>>>> supported shortly?
>>>>> Zero is my estimate. The way to let one's steam about them is just
>>>>> not to buy ther hardware. Their attitude to open sourse and
>>>>> unwillingness to disclose details of their hardware was always much
>>>>> worse than that of their competitors (ATI/AMD, matrox...).
>>>>> This is just my opinion based on my subjective observations.
>>>> I'm sure on an episode of bsdnow, they mentioned asking an nvidia dev
>>>> at one of the conferences and they said there shouldn't be any 
>>>> technical
>>>> reason, it just isn't enabled in the build and they would look into 
>>>> it.
>>>> Still hasn't helped any.
>>> Just like Vulkan, just like KMS, just like encoding/capture 
>>> acceleration.
>>> NVIDIA always conveniently forgets about FreeBSD. However, the ailment
>>> isn't really specific to NVIDIA but affects most binary blob vendors.
>>> For one, Widevine CDM is maintained by Google but EME itself was pushed
>>> to W3C by Netflix, a FreeBSD vendor which conveniently forgot a browser
>>> can run on FreeBSD.
>> What is FreeBSD market share?
>> Could be the market share of FreeBSD is so small it is not worth 
>> their time?
>> Maybe the FreeBSD developers are too abrasive?
>> Or maybe some other reason?
>> Linux is everywhere so maybe that is why Linux gets all the glory?
> It seems (to me) that fbsd might be dropped altogether, and developers
> will not waste their time and talent on an OS that has a very very small
> installed base.

exactly my point.  Plus the way development is proceeding it make for 
sure that freebsd will bite the dust.  It really does not offer anything 
that other os already have

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>