Dvxk: A Vulkan-Based D3D11 Implementation for Linux with Wine • Hacker News Board

Re: Dvxk: A Vulkan-Based D3D11 Implementation for Linux with Wine

#11

Post by Const-me » Sun, Jan 21, 2018, 11:24 PM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #7

PoL0 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The majority of new APIs are UWP only Microsoft APIs? Or APIs in general (which I doubt). Microsoft will try everything to push UWP into our PCs but I've been using Win10 for a couple years now and the only UWP application I (barely) use is Sticky Notes. The rest of my application ecosystem hasn't changed much.

Windows 10 APIs of course. Well, Win32 is still there, but not on Windows 10 S and on ARM Windows 10 Always Connected PCs it gets JITed while UWP runs natively.

AFAIK it’ll work the same way for desktop win32, and store UWP apps.

Both will be JIT-ed if there’s no ARM binaries available, both can be compiled to native ARM64 binaries: https://mspoweruser.com/windows-arm64-gets-first-compiled-ap...

Re: Dvxk: A Vulkan-Based D3D11 Implementation for Linux with Wine

#12

Post by pjmlp » Sun, Jan 21, 2018, 11:27 PM UTC

Const-me wrote: post #11

pjmlp wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Windows 10 APIs of course. Well, Win32 is still there, but not on Windows 10 S and on ARM Windows 10 Always Connected PCs it gets JITed while UWP runs natively.

AFAIK it’ll work the same way for desktop win32, and store UWP apps. Both will be JIT-ed if there’s no ARM binaries available, both can be compiled to native ARM64 binaries: https://mspoweruser.com/windows-arm64-gets-first-compiled-ap...

Currently the JIT only works for x86-32, not x86-64.

Re: Dvxk: A Vulkan-Based D3D11 Implementation for Linux with Wine

#13

Post by Const-me » Sun, Jan 21, 2018, 11:35 PM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #12

Const-me wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK it’ll work the same way for desktop win32, and store UWP apps. Both will be JIT-ed if there’s no ARM binaries available, both can be compiled to native ARM64 binaries: https://mspoweruser.com/windows-arm64-gets-first-compiled-ap...

Currently the JIT only works for x86-32, not x86-64.

That’s true, but quite a lot of modern desktop software still comes with 32-bit binaries. Even Microsoft’s own software: visual studio and skype are still 32 bit, office has both versions…

Re: Dvxk: A Vulkan-Based D3D11 Implementation for Linux with Wine

#14

Post by bitwize » Mon, Jan 22, 2018, 12:03 AM UTC

vetinari wrote: post #10

pjmlp wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Windows 10 APIs of course. Well, Win32 is still there, but not on Windows 10 S and on ARM Windows 10 Always Connected PCs it gets JITed while UWP runs natively.

Microsoft tried that with Windows RT. It's riskier to that specific Windows edition than to the Win32.

And they're going to keep trying until it finally sticks. It's like Palladium or the Scientology Fair Game policy: just because people don't like it doesn't make it not critical to the organization. They just have to backpedal publicly to re-establish good PR, then sneak it in quietly while people's guard is down.

Re: Dvxk: A Vulkan-Based D3D11 Implementation for Linux with Wine

#15

Post by asveikau » Mon, Jan 22, 2018, 1:22 AM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #5

brann0 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately, most of us aren't interested in UWP bloat and just want to build good old desktop applications.

Win32 is going the way of Carbon even if it takes a couple of years more, like it or not. Desktop bridge is just a migration tool to migrate Win32 into the store, and help developers slowly migrate parts of the apps into UWP ones. The majority of new APIs are UWP only, with userspace drivers, DirectX 12, ReFS being the notable exceptions. Of course you can always switch to GNU/Linux for Vulkan games.

> Win32 is going the way of Carbon even if it takes a couple of years more, like it or not.

That's the thing, nobody likes it. They've been pushing "modern apps"[1] since 2012 and nobody notable is writing them. As Surface RT showed in the market, when forced to make the choice people will just abandon the product rather than put up with that mediocrity.

[1] Orwellian calling it "modern" just in the name, as if that saves a bunch of work to come up with actual modern stuff that works.

Re: Dvxk: A Vulkan-Based D3D11 Implementation for Linux with Wine

#16

Post by wildmusings » Mon, Jan 22, 2018, 1:50 AM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #5

brann0 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately, most of us aren't interested in UWP bloat and just want to build good old desktop applications.

Win32 is going the way of Carbon even if it takes a couple of years more, like it or not. Desktop bridge is just a migration tool to migrate Win32 into the store, and help developers slowly migrate parts of the apps into UWP ones. The majority of new APIs are UWP only, with userspace drivers, DirectX 12, ReFS being the notable exceptions. Of course you can always switch to GNU/Linux for Vulkan games.

With a few exceptions, you can call UWP APIs from Win32 code.

Re: Dvxk: A Vulkan-Based D3D11 Implementation for Linux with Wine

#17

Post by atomicrat2552 » Mon, Jan 22, 2018, 3:12 AM UTC

ysleepy wrote: post #2

I wonder if this is useful on Windows too. The driver complexity could be reduced significantly and the quirks for games could be implemented in an industry shared dx2vulkan layer. Especially as newer games migrate to vulkan, the remaining DX games will run fine on the then much better hardware, compensating the possible overhead.

I mean, the DirectX SDK already has a similar runtime to use a DX11 swapchain on top of DX12, and 11-on-12 is how (as I understand it, though someone more knowledgeable feel free to correct me) DX11 is implemented on Xbox One and UWP

Re: Dvxk: A Vulkan-Based D3D11 Implementation for Linux with Wine

#18

Post by shmerl » Mon, Jan 22, 2018, 3:35 AM UTC

Pretty good progress. It's aimed as a drop in replacement for Wine's D3D11 over OpenGL implementation.

Meanwhile Wine developers are working on vkd3d for D3D12 → Vulkan translation: https://source.winehq.org/git/vkd3d.git/

Re: Dvxk: A Vulkan-Based D3D11 Implementation for Linux with Wine

#19

Post by shmerl » Mon, Jan 22, 2018, 3:38 AM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #3

ysleepy wrote: post #2

I wonder if this is useful on Windows too. The driver complexity could be reduced significantly and the quirks for games could be implemented in an industry shared dx2vulkan layer. Especially as newer games migrate to vulkan, the remaining DX games will run fine on the then much better hardware, compensating the possible overhead.

If you want to use Vulkan on Windows 10 UWP apps, yes it might be useful. Vulkan is only supported in desktop mode using the same ICD driver mechanism used by OpenGL drivers, which is not currently supported in UWP sandbox model.

> Vulkan is only supported in desktop mode using the same ICD driver mechanism used by OpenGL drivers, which is not currently supported in UWP sandbox model.

Another reason for developers to avoid UWP.

Re: Dvxk: A Vulkan-Based D3D11 Implementation for Linux with Wine

#20

Post by pjmlp » Mon, Jan 22, 2018, 5:29 AM UTC

shmerl wrote: post #19

pjmlp wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to use Vulkan on Windows 10 UWP apps, yes it might be useful. Vulkan is only supported in desktop mode using the same ICD driver mechanism used by OpenGL drivers, which is not currently supported in UWP sandbox model.

> Vulkan is only supported in desktop mode using the same ICD driver mechanism used by OpenGL drivers, which is not currently supported in UWP sandbox model. Another reason for developers to avoid UWP.

Not an problem for anyone using game engines.