** Description changed: - The 515 series introduced open kernel modules for the NVIDIA driver. - They come with an open source licence, and should be provided as an - option for datacenter GPUs: + [ Impact ] - https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/nvidia-releases-open-source-gpu- - kernel-modules/ + * The 515 series introduced open kernel modules for the NVIDIA driver. They come with an open source licence, and should be provided as an option for datacenter GPUs: + https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/nvidia-releases-open-source-gpu-kernel-modules/ + + Currently, this is only production-ready (and enabled) on datacenter + GPUs. + + * We should enable signed modules for the 515-open drivers, giving + users the option to try the drivers. + + * The ubuntu-drivers tool should set a lower priority for the -open + flavour, so that we do not end up recommending it over the plain 515 + flavour. + + [ Test Plan ] + + * detailed instructions how to reproduce the bug + + * these should allow someone who is not familiar with the affected + package to reproduce the bug and verify that the updated package fixes + the problem. + + * if other testing is appropriate to perform before landing this update, + this should also be described here. + + [ Where problems could occur ] + + * Think about what the upload changes in the software. Imagine the change is + wrong or breaks something else: how would this show up? + + * It is assumed that any SRU candidate patch is well-tested before + upload and has a low overall risk of regression, but it's important + to make the effort to think about what ''could'' happen in the + event of a regression. + + * This must '''never''' be "None" or "Low", or entirely an argument as to why + your upload is low risk. + + * This both shows the SRU team that the risks have been considered, + and provides guidance to testers in regression-testing the SRU. + + [ Other Info ] + + * Anything else you think is useful to include + * Anticipate questions from users, SRU, +1 maintenance, security teams and the Technical Board + * and address these questions in advance
-- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel Packages, which is subscribed to linux-restricted-modules in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1988836 Title: Enable the open NVIDIA kernel modules Status in linux-restricted-modules package in Ubuntu: In Progress Status in nvidia-graphics-drivers-515 package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in ubuntu-drivers-common package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in linux-restricted-modules source package in Focal: In Progress Status in nvidia-graphics-drivers-515 source package in Focal: In Progress Status in ubuntu-drivers-common source package in Focal: In Progress Status in linux-restricted-modules source package in Jammy: In Progress Status in nvidia-graphics-drivers-515 source package in Jammy: In Progress Status in ubuntu-drivers-common source package in Jammy: In Progress Bug description: [ Impact ] * The 515 series introduced open kernel modules for the NVIDIA driver. They come with an open source licence, and should be provided as an option for datacenter GPUs: https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/nvidia-releases-open-source-gpu-kernel-modules/ Currently, this is only production-ready (and enabled) on datacenter GPUs. * We should enable signed modules for the 515-open drivers, giving users the option to try the drivers. * The ubuntu-drivers tool should set a lower priority for the -open flavour, so that we do not end up recommending it over the plain 515 flavour. [ Test Plan ] * detailed instructions how to reproduce the bug * these should allow someone who is not familiar with the affected package to reproduce the bug and verify that the updated package fixes the problem. * if other testing is appropriate to perform before landing this update, this should also be described here. [ Where problems could occur ] * Think about what the upload changes in the software. Imagine the change is wrong or breaks something else: how would this show up? * It is assumed that any SRU candidate patch is well-tested before upload and has a low overall risk of regression, but it's important to make the effort to think about what ''could'' happen in the event of a regression. * This must '''never''' be "None" or "Low", or entirely an argument as to why your upload is low risk. * This both shows the SRU team that the risks have been considered, and provides guidance to testers in regression-testing the SRU. [ Other Info ] * Anything else you think is useful to include * Anticipate questions from users, SRU, +1 maintenance, security teams and the Technical Board * and address these questions in advance To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-restricted-modules/+bug/1988836/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages Post to : kernel-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
