On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 03:56:14PM -0500, Kevin Gunn wrote: > > Ubuntu supports a growing number of ARM servers that have PCIe slots, > > so external GPUs can be added. CUDA is supported on those platforms > > upstream: > > https://developer.nvidia.com/cuda-toolkit-65 > > And I do know there are users interested in CUDA on Ubuntu/arm64.
> > I'm not experienced with CUDA myself - and don't have a card to test it > > - but it would be good to know if we're breaking that use case ahead of > > time. > That's fair enough. I guess that's back to the original statement about > "Do we really have to cripple an architecture like > >> this?" > It's not about the arch per se it's more about having offerings that match > Gpus attached to that arch. So does it make sense to leave them in place > and just know you'll have build failures in some cases? There are two ways to make a GLES-enabled Qt stack available on arm64; the armhf way (build Qt exclusively for GLES), or the x86 way (build alternative stacks for both GL and GLES). Which we should pursue depends on whether there is a use case for OpenGL Qt software anywhere on ARM64. For the phone / embedded GPU case, we have no known chips providing accelerated OpenGL drivers. For the server / add-on GPU case, we have no known uses for GUI toolkits - only CUDA and GPU-accelerated computation. So from what I know, we should be fine to ship GLES-only Qt on ARM64, and delete any ARM64 binaries from the archive that require GL-enabled Qt. Either way, we're not going to leave unbuildable binaries hanging around in the archive. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel