KhronosGroup / KhronosGroup/Vulkan-Docs
Shouldn't layered drivers (as in VK_MSFT_layered_driver extension support) be reported only if VK_MSFT_layered_driver extension support is requested during vkCreateInstance?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- JavaScript
- Stars
- 3.3k
- Forks
- 549
- Avg merge
- 5d 5h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 2
Description
With recent loader updates and MSFT changes, we see workloads broken on repeated LUIDs, when Windows exposes layered drivers.
Old workloads does not need to be aware of the presence of layered drivers, and those should not be exposed, unless workload specifically asks for one (for example, by enabling VK_MSFT_layered_driver extension in VkInstanceCreateInfo).
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reading the Vulkan specification sections for vkCreateInstance, VkInstanceCreateInfo, and VK_MSFT_layered_driver. Compare the documented extension-reporting behavior with the repeated-LUID workload problem described here. Done means the specification clearly defines whether layered drivers are reported only when the extension is requested and resolves the compatibility behavior for older workloads.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- api, documentation
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 32/100