If you look at a recent release RK356x that has boards out in the wild and initial prototyping has been done then a small percentage is funding GPU, VPU work.
All you have to do is read the long and extensive discussions around Kernel.org and the sponsors of actors in that involvement.
For more Rockchip ARM Motherboardinformation, please contact us. We will provide professional answers.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/log/?h=v5.17-rc1&qt=grep&q=rk3568
This work is submiited to each linux-next release schedule and that is the nature of things as commercial android devices widen there sphere to opensource use.
To post here on the RK3588 that a fund is needed to work on GPU, VPU before boards are released whilst vendor EVBs are still very fresh ignores there is funds and work is being done as the above link will show and how that work has to be submitted into the Linux release schedule.
The forum already exists and its very active, very efficient and does remarkable work and its all documented in the Kernel Archives and there is no advantage at all to flooding that discourse with consumer level ignorance.
That may sound condescending but when you ask at consumer level what could they add to the software engineering process of low level drivers that often needs reverse engineering, what could a consumer offer apart from $ and compliments, whilst still essentially pre-release.
When Warren East was replaced by Simon Segars at Arm it signalled a direction and calls of dictate for a billion $ company that creates revenue from licencing is an act of the tail wagging the dog and its not going to happen and why the sale to Nvidia should definately not.
Android again is similar as you can discuss and make offers but the Dog is Google and the dictate is thiers.
So in the context of what is possible and available what you are calling for is already happening and it is driven by a very small fund and due to the amazing work and small core of Linux it is distributed very efficiently to a very large herd.
The transparency of this probably doesn’t work well to the herd (aka consumer) as what is provided as funds is likely what is currently available and maybe it could be made more visible with a better donation model where consumer $ and compliements can be made.
Many donations lack any metadata to why or what may of prompted a donation and lack the user led nature of opensource as the diverse array of offering of work a provider may give often only has a single branded unitary donation model.
For more information, please visit Linux SOM for Advertising.
There are many forums, many providers and often many actors involved in specific work that should make a donation model more transparent by a simple link for donation that includes the metadata of specific consumer interest.
You can not dictate to a vendor that they are not charging enough to provide enough funding for hardware and software reliability issues as they work to whatever business model they think is appropriate as again that is the tail wagging the dog.
I do think vendors can employ a better donation model so that in any discourse there is a simple link so a consumer can make an expression of ‘I would like some of that’ or ‘Thanks for what your doing’ that actually provides metadata feedback to what the consumer appreciates and the dog might wag its tail.
If consumers want to donate to show specific interest or provide specific appreciation then maybe it isn’t the tail wagging the dog to ask vendors to provide a better, more granular donation model to the feedback they apreciate in terms of specifics and who by and champion the individual providers a tad more with a bit more transparency.
AR3399RK is ideal for a broad range of computer applications across multiple market segments, including informational or self-service kiosks, entertainment systems, retail display signage, casino gaming & lotto, or any other application requiring high definition video playback with a cost effective or low power computing device.
AR3399RK is an SBC meaning it’s ready-to-go and just requires power. As a BCM standard off-the-shelf product, it’s ready to deploy vs the typical SoM based ARM products requiring a separate and often custom carrier board. BCM’s SBC concept helps to reduced-design-risk and quicken time-to-market and more importantly time-to-revenue.
For those companies needing something special or unique, BCM provides cost effective and highly professional custom ODM/OEM design services for qualifying projects as a fraction of the cost of developing in-house.
The company is the world’s best AIOT Core Board supplier. We are your one-stop shop for all needs. Our staff are highly-specialized and will help you find the product you need.
System CPU Rockchip® RK3399 Dual Core Cortex-A72 + Quad Core Cortex-A53 (6-Core) SoC System Memory 2GB DDR3L Onboard (Expandable to 4GB Max) Storage 1 x uSD Card Socket