Microsoft Has Another Go At Their DirectX Linux Kernel Driver

[muncrief]

well, the primairy issue right now is that it doesn't seem like the MS devs know how to submit a patch. Ill reserve comment on how much of a change the patch series is. have you seen the criticism of the patches? it's pretty bad. before debating on the merits of including it, there appear to be quite a few... both technical design issues. and just overall bad patch issues. (v3 and they don't even have the right copyright year) now, Im a pretty shit developer. good for only basic hacks. so on that merit, maybe I shouldn't comment. but I feel like MS should at least have the basics of the patch down before submitting it for review.

Since I'm not at all familiar with the low level Linux graphics architecture the major issue I gleaned was that the patch didn't fit into the current API, and therefore couldn't be utilized by current native programs. As a hardware/firmware/software designer I'm familiar with arguments of strategy and style though, and observed them in this thread as well, but like I said I don't know enough about the architecture to evaluate them.

Also as I intimated, I just have a bad feeling about Microsoft and Intel. Every time I've thought they were changing for the better they've remained the same, or become worse than before.

[Quackdoc]

Since I'm not at all familiar with the low level Linux graphics architecture the major issue I gleaned was that the patch didn't fit into the current API, and therefore couldn't be utilized by current native programs. As a hardware/firmware/software designer I'm familiar with arguments of strategy and style though, and observed them in this thread as well, but like I said I don't know enough about the architecture to evaluate them.

Also as I intimated, I just have a bad feeling about Microsoft and Intel. Every time I've thought they were changing for the better they've remained the same, or become worse than before.

I don't feel so bad about intel, I feel like a lot of foss projects with Intel, they just throw their money to divisions and says "make us look good" and lets the tech guys go free willy to an extent. or goes to a team and says, "hey we need this, go do it" and then again gives them some anonymity as to how to go about it. when Intel publishes something foss, I have a feeling that it will be beneficial (if they don't just wind up drop working on it with meaningful capacity like they seemingly did with GVT-G). even if they do scummy shit, it feels... separate to to speak

MS on the other hand does feels like they make their projects intentionally to fuck with people. open source or not. it always winds up feeling malicious.

[chithanh]

Also as I intimated, I just have a bad feeling about Microsoft and Intel. Every time I've thought they were changing for the better they've remained the same, or become worse than before.

when Intel publishes something foss, I have a feeling that it will be beneficial (if they don't just wind up drop working on it with meaningful capacity like they seemingly did with GVT-G). even if they do scummy shit, it feels... separate to to speak

Microsoft is worse, but I think the MKL situation showed that the old corporate Intel still very much exists and is in control.

And it is not limited completely to the non-FOSS parts. I remember how i915 maintainers refused integration of reverse engineered Poulsbo code, and insisted on the separate gma500 driver despite extensive amount of code duplication between the drivers.