3 ms·
There are somewhat more subtle differences: Not only are modules not tied to a particular kernel, they are also (to varying degrees) isolated against the rest o
by creshal 11y ago
There are somewhat more subtle differences: Not only are modules not tied to a particular kernel, they are also (to varying degrees) isolated against the rest of the kernel.
WDDM in particular can recover from a driver crash and restart hardware and driver (which you can trivially demonstrate on an AMD card by waiting for an hour or two…), while Linux (and Windows XP with its older driver model, and probably BSDs) will panic the entire kernel on problems like this.
- gh02t 11y agoYeah, that's what I thought with NT, which is that drivers are much more isolated. If I understand it correctly drivers can still cause a kernel panic, but Microsoft requires that signed drivers pass a formal verification, which has greatly cut down on blue screens. I'm just an armchair observer though, so I'm not an expert. I was always greatly impressed by Windows' recent ability to recover from something like a display driver crash with hardly a hiccup. That's pretty impressive voodoo.