Microsoft Posts Updated "DXGKRNL" Linux Kernel Driver For WSL/WSA

[Quackdoc]

alright, then it goes back to my point, their whole "microsoft <3 linux" is just, well a lie. everything they have done is to make linux run better on windows and nothing in return in helping windows run well on linux. its a one sided benefit and it does nothing in the long run to benefit linux if we are going to go down the path of self interest.

well considering that the devs who are working on d3d12 backend have helped mr. blumenkrantz, and contributed to the OGL state tracker and tests, the idea that they have "a one sided benefit" is blatantly false. this helps a lot with running linux in a VM on hyper-v servers. unless you are some purist who thinks linux should only be allowed to work on barebones software, I do not see how running linux in a vm, is not beneficial to linux...

[middy]

because it's a kernel interface. kernel interfaces should be in the kernel. should we also remove the vmware bits from the kernel?



this won't directly benefit wsl2 users other than them not needing to rely on custom kernels. they already have all of these bits, the biggest beneficiary here besides niche people in WSL2, is hyper-v with gpu-pv



their DX API is a lot more than d3d, but for a second let's talk about just D3D. not only is it beneficial for them to keep it closed source on the desktop world, for a couple reasons, (they do want their pseudo tech utopia) but it is also really good for them on the console world, as it in part helps a lot to fight against things like emulation and whatnot.

alright, then it goes back to my point, their whole "microsoft <3 linux" is just, well a lie. everything they have done is to make linux run better on windows and nothing in return in helping windows run well on linux. its a one sided benefit and it does nothing in the long run to benefit linux if we are going to go down the path of self interest.

[Quackdoc]

Why does this thing has to be in the kernel repository?

The way I see it, it is a solution used on a specific Microsoft product and maintained by Microsoft people.

because it's a kernel interface. kernel interfaces should be in the kernel. should we also remove the vmware bits from the kernel?

basically, if DXGKRNL get mainlined, the easiest way to have a fully accelerated 3D linux system will be to run WSL, right?

this won't directly benefit wsl2 users other than them not needing to rely on custom kernels. they already have all of these bits, the biggest beneficiary here besides niche people in WSL2, is hyper-v with gpu-pv

i don't know why microsoft refuses to open source their directX api and help port it to linux. its not like they really make that much money off it. if they truly <3 linux like they claim, that be a big "see, we really do <3 linux." so far all their "<3" linux has been helping microsoft by making linux run better on windows and maybe that cascadia font. none of it has really been about "helping" linux. valve has done more to <3 linux than microsoft.

their DX API is a lot more than d3d, but for a second let's talk about just D3D. not only is it beneficial for them to keep it closed source on the desktop world, for a couple reasons, (they do want their pseudo tech utopia) but it is also really good for them on the console world, as it in part helps a lot to fight against things like emulation and whatnot.

[middy]

i don't know why microsoft refuses to open source their directX api and help port it to linux. its not like they really make that much money off it. if they truly <3 linux like they claim, that be a big "see, we really do <3 linux." so far all their "<3" linux has been helping microsoft by making linux run better on windows and maybe that cascadia font. none of it has really been about "helping" linux. in comparison valve has done more to <3 linux than microsoft.

i wouldn't care about microsoft wanting to make linux run on windows if microsoft just gave more equal love to linux. help improve running windows things on linux at the same time. contribute to wine. open up some of their api's as open standards, etc. encourage and help make gaming more portable. especially with microsoft buying up game studios for a few billion each.

[Vermilion]

... The way I see it, it is a solution used on a specific Microsoft product and maintained by Microsoft people ...

This could be said about almost all Kernel drivers out there...
In the same sense you could say, why GPU drivers are embedded in the kernel, they're used on specific products, and maintained by their respective vendors.

[RomuloP]

basically, if DXGKRNL get mainlined, the easiest way to have a fully accelerated 3D linux system will be to run WSL, right?

I hate to admit that Microsoft is playing a very good strategy.

How dare you... Stop right there, return to the "not learning anything and not forgetting anything" state!

[sinepgib]

basically, if DXGKRNL get mainlined, the easiest way to have a fully accelerated 3D linux system will be to run WSL, right?

I hate to admit that Microsoft is playing a very good strategy.

I don't think anyone willing to use WSL cares a lot about what's the easiest way to have a fully accelerated 3D Linux system. If you go for native Linux it's most likely because, for one reason or another, you wanted to avoid Windows in the first place. For those using WSL acceleration in the Linux subsystem is pretty much just a bonus IMO.

Why does this thing has to be in the kernel repository?

The way I see it, it is a solution used on a specific Microsoft product and maintained by Microsoft people.

It is not that I am fundamentally against it or anything.. I just wonder..

Essentially, it makes maintenance easier (no tracking of multiple kernel versions due to changing interfaces, no delay for support) and deployment as well in case arbitrary distros are allowed (I have no idea if that's the case).

I'm not sure why people think this controversial. It's much better than having no driver, or *ahem* a binary blob. If this wasn't Microsoft, no-one would even notice.

If it bothers you, just disable/delete the module. Job done (well, there are probably a bunch of other modules you'll want to disable too realistically...)

You're thinking like a user here. Merging any kind of code in mainline means extra work for developers. That's why, by default, nobody wants your code. You need to make a point why it's actually a good tradeoff. If kernel developers and their clients (as in, the ones who actually do pay) don't use WSL2, would they care whether there is no driver, a binary blob or some other thing? I guess no. So the disabling, deleting, etc, of modules doesn't really cut it.

That said, I think it's a good thing that you're right on people just being anti-MS. I don't think devs will refuse the patch, and those putting the hours get to decide what gets in. Everything else is, IMO, pure entitlement.

[cynic]

basically, if DXGKRNL get mainlined, the easiest way to have a fully accelerated 3D linux system will be to run WSL, right?

I hate to admit that Microsoft is playing a very good strategy.

[zoomblab]

Why does this thing has to be in the kernel repository?

The way I see it, it is a solution used on a specific Microsoft product and maintained by Microsoft people.

It is not that I am fundamentally against it or anything.. I just wonder..

[novideo]

just merge the oneAPI without directx.