Wine Developers Not Yet Convinced By Direct3D 9 In Mesa's Gallium

[You-]

GalliumNine... would be used outside AMD graphics cards?

With nVidia I suspect for performance people use the proprietory driver.

intel doesnt use gallium at all.

While I would want them to create integration points for this state tracker, I dont think they can move over to it totally - just allow it as an option.

It wont reduce their work and those asking for a fork in thsi thread should go ahead and make a fork if they want it that badly.

[Commander]

When, like 3 years from now? They've been working on CSMT for years now and its been in CrossOver for a while now. Didn't they say they plan to scrap CSMT and make a new improved something?

Yea no I'm going to continue to use patched versions of wine that have gallium and CSMT in it.

They are waiting on CSMT because they are rethinking how the implementation should be with d3d10 etc.. Give them time to make it work correctly and not be a hack like it currently is.

[Azrael5]

Excellent.... DirectX 9 implementation!!!

[zanny]

WineD3D: D3D7, D3D8, D3D9, D3D10 (almost) D3D11 (some of, I think)

GalliumNine: D3D9 only.

Maybe they could look at some of the gstreamer plugin code. The way hardware decoding can be used when available but there is an entire cascade of fallbacks when needed. You could just gall galliumnine the "hardware acceleration" of Wine.

The way it should work is: Try the Gallium Native Call -> doesn't exist / didn't work? -> translate to OpenGL. And that should apply in general, it is the same class of problem as software fallback when an OGL function does not work or is not provided with driver support.

[philcostin]

As an extension to my other post, although I mentioned that it's not easy for that kind of an inbound change when you're already invested in something, I don't want to put across the idea that the wined3d developers really are desperate to hang on to old code - good developers (like them) will already know that "you are not your code" - but want to clarify that I was empathizing with the situation.

And sure - while patches continue to be available for wine, why not just apply them yourself? Sounds like a fine solution to me, and when the wine devs feel they are ready, maybe they'll merge bits of it as necessary as time goes by.

[mannerov]

I can use nine for d3d9 and use wine for everything else...

[philcostin]

Yep, it can be annoying when someone puts thousands of hours into a project which gets destroyed by another, smaller project (in terms of compability and performance).

If they don't want to merge GalliumNine, fuck them, like someone has said, time to fork

Look at it this way:

WineD3D: D3D7, D3D8, D3D9, D3D10 (almost) D3D11 (some of, I think)

GalliumNine: D3D9 only.

I mean sure, it's fast and sure, people saw it coming - but it's not reasonable to expect the devs to drop their tools on the floor before they're done (don't forget, while some are paid by codeweavers, for others it is a hobby and they've got a plan in mind. When a developer has a plan in-mind, you can't just tap him on the shoulder and offer him a working, fast, good-enough-for-you "thing". A: He's busy. B: Just getting his head around what you've put under his nose will require dropping what he's already doing, when he's almost there anyway.)

They will adopt it, I'm sure, but just because it works with a few patches, don't assume the wine devs will want to chuck their plans straight out the window and focus on ONLY D3D9.

[Dukenukemx]

It's time to fork I think.

Would be interesting to see if this would give as much boost as GalliumNine.

When, like 3 years from now? They've been working on CSMT for years now and its been in CrossOver for a while now. Didn't they say they plan to scrap CSMT and make a new improved something?

Yea no I'm going to continue to use patched versions of wine that have gallium and CSMT in it.

[ObiWan]

Well Wines D3D9 implementation is more complete then the GalliumNine one.

To give an example, it's possible that translating D3D bytecode to TGSI instead of GLSL ends up with better shader code for the hardware.

Would be interesting to see if this would give as much boost as GalliumNine.

[gutigen]

Let me just say this: I can totally understand why they would not want to rush into something like this. It is so easy to think "Oh, DirectX9 state tracker?! Great, let's move to that" but when you realize the sheer complexity of the undertaking, and look at it from their point of view - the man hours that have already gone into well tested code

Yep, it can be annoying when someone puts thousands of hours into a project which gets destroyed by another, smaller project (in terms of compability and performance).

If they don't want to merge GalliumNine, fuck them, like someone has said, time to fork