Microsoft Working On Direct3D 12 Video Acceleration For Mesa

[geearf]

Why does Mesa accept these contributions? What's the benefit of accepting something that does not benefit a single nix OS?

[blackiwid]

Why does Mesa accept these contributions? What's the benefit of accepting something that does not benefit a single nix OS?

Are there multiple NixOS?

https://nixos.org/

[smitty3268]

Disappointing then, thanks for the replies. I figured because it was being "open-sourced" that it would be useful in some way.

Even if it's not directly helpful, it could help pave the way for other drivers like virgl to do the same kind of thing. So while this isn't a big deal for linux users, I think declaring it totally useless might be a bit overzealous.

[smitty3268]

Why does Mesa accept these contributions? What's the benefit of accepting something that does not benefit a single nix OS?

Mesa has never been tied to *nix OS's only. The project has always been about open source support for graphics, not anything directly tied to only hardware GPUs, or only on linux, etc.

They don't restrict to GPL contributions only either, for example, and have gotten a lot of good contributions over the years from groups like VMWare, who are just as proprietary as Microsoft ever has been.

[smitty3268]

Can someone please explain why does D3D12 even exist? I know that it was released earlier than Vulkan. But what's a benefit from using it instead of Vulkan? Or it's just an instrument of Microsoft supremacy?

Vulkan works everywhere, and literally any graphical API was implemented on top of it.

D3D9 -> dxvk (formelly d9vk) -> Vulkan
D3D10-11 -> dxvk -> Vulkan
D3D12 -> vk3d -> Vulkan
OpenGL -> Zink -> Vulkan

You can't complain about D3D12 existing when it came out before Vulkan. It was there first.

Otherwise, it:

• Has deep integration with HLSL, which is something even all the new Vulkan apps still use
• Has an easier learning curve for people used to programming in D3D11, because it still has various D3D-isms, and doesn't have to worry about all the crazy ARM stuff Vulkan has to account for
• Presumably has a much easier porting process for xbox games than Vulkan
• You don't have to worry about how many months it will take AMD to support some new feature, because they always support D3D12 ASAP, unlike Vulkan (see raytracing).

If you're asking why people use it, it's just the path of least resistance for a lot of people. Linux is a non-factor for them, so they are evaluating the use of D3D12 vs Vulkan on Windows only, and from that point of view there's no real reason not to use the one that MS supports more directly.

[geearf]

Are there multiple NixOS?
https://nixos.org/

By nix I meant BSD, Linux, etc.

Mesa has never been tied to *nix OS's only. The project has always been about open source support for graphics, not anything directly tied to only hardware GPUs, or only on linux, etc.

I see, thank.

[shmerl]

Waiting for good news - MS and Apple decided to support Vulkan as a first class API. So far this looks like feeding MS lock-in further.

[shmerl]

You can't complain about D3D12 existing when it came out before Vulkan. It was there first.

No, I think you legit can complain about it if you analyze the history of it. It was created as a clear lock-in push, with MS knowing perfectly well that collaborative project (not yet named Vulkan then) was going to happen. That's because AMD proposed to make such collaborative project using Mantle.

MS took said Mantle and made DX12 out of it. Khronos did the same thing but to make Vulkan. And not only no one stopped MS from joining the Vulkan effort, no one was forcing them to push their NIH first either, knowing full well it will create a rift. They did it simply for market control reasons. Lock-in is in their corporate DNA (though I'd say today Apple is even worse in this sense).

See also: https://twitter.com/renderpipeline/s...86347450007553

[smitty3268]

No, I think you legit can complain about if if you analyze the history of it.

Well, yeah, people obviously can complain about anything. But i don't find it valid, personally. It came out first, and at the time Vulkan was seemingly mired in quicksand and no one knew if it would be successful or not.

It would be nice if companies were altruistic and wanted to help out the linux community, but i don't hold them to that high a standard. They're always going to look out for themselves first.

[shmerl]

Well, yeah, people obviously can complain about anything. But i don't find it valid, personally. It came out first, and at the time Vulkan was seemingly mired in quicksand and no one knew if it would be successful or not.

As above, pushing it out first doesn't excuse their lock-in motivation for me. It's as crooked as it has always been.