I'd like to open an OpenGL context without X in Linux. Is there any way at all to do it?
I know it's possible for integrated Intel graphics card hardware, though most people have Nvidia cards in their system. I'd like to get a solution that works with Nvidia cards.
If there's no other way than through integrated Intel hardware, I guess it'd be okay to know how it's done with those.
X11 protocol itself is too large and complex. Mouse/Keyboard/Tablet input multiplexing it provides is too watered-down for modern programs. I think it's the worst roadblock that prevents Linux desktop from improving, which is why I look for alternatives.
Update (Sep. 17, 2017):
NVIDIA recently published an article detailing how to use OpenGL on headless systems, which is a very similar use case as the question describes.
In summary:
Link to libOpenGL.so and libEGL.so instead of libGL.so. (Your linker options should therefore be -lOpenGL -lEGL
Call eglGetDisplay, then eglInitialize to initialize EGL.
Call eglChooseConfig with the config attribute EGL_SURFACE_TYPE followed with EGL_PBUFFER_BIT.
Call eglCreatePbufferSurface, then eglBindApi(EGL_OPENGL_API);, then eglCreateContext and eglMakeCurrent.
From that point on, do your OpenGL rendering as usual, and you can blit your pixel buffer surface wherever you like. This supplementary article from NVIDIA includes a basic example and an example for multiple GPUs. The PBuffer surface can also be replaced with a window surface or pixmap surface, according to the application needs.
I regret not doing more research on this on my previous edit, but oh well. Better answers are better answers.
Since my answer in 2010, there have been a number of major shakeups in the Linux graphics space. So, an updated answer:
Today, nouveau and the other DRI drivers have matured to the point where OpenGL software is stable and performs reasonably well in general. With the introduction of the EGL API in Mesa, it's now possible to write OpenGL and OpenGL ES applications on even Linux desktops.
You can write your application to target EGL, and it can be run without the presence of a window manager or even a compositor. To do so, you would call eglGetDisplay, eglInitialize, and ultimately eglCreateContext and eglMakeCurrent, instead of the usual glx calls to do the same.
I do not know the specific code path for working without a display server, but EGL accepts both X11 displays and Wayland displays, and I do know it is possible for EGL to operate without one. You can create GL ES 1.1, ES 2.0, ES 3.0 (if you have Mesa 9.1 or later), and OpenGL 3.1 (Mesa 9.0 or later) contexts. Mesa has not (as of Sep. 2013) yet implemented OpenGL 3.2 Core.
Notably, on the Raspberry Pi and on Android, EGL and GL ES 2.0 (1.1 on Android < 3.0) are supported by default. On the Raspberry Pi, I don't think Wayland yet works (as of Sep. 2013), but you do get EGL without a display server using the included binary drivers. Your EGL code should also be portable (with minimal modification) to iOS, if that interests you.
Below is the outdated, previously accepted post:
I'd like to open an OpenGL context without X in linux. Is there any way at all to do it?
I believe Mesa provides a framebuffer target. If it provides any hardware acceleration at all, it will only be with hardware for which there are open source drivers that have been adapted to support such a use.
Gallium3D is also immature, and support for this isn't even on the roadmap, as far as I know.
I'd like to get a solution that works with nvidia cards.
There isn't one. Period.
NVIDIA only provides an X driver, and the Nouveau project is still immature, and doesn't support the kind of use that you're looking for, as they are currently focused only on the X11 driver.
You might be interested in a project called Wayland
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayland_%28display_server%29
Have you looked at this page?
http://virtuousgeek.org/blog/index.php/jbarnes/2011/10/31/writing_stanalone_programs_with_egl_and_
It is likely a bit outdated. I haven't tried yet, but I would appreciate more documentation of this type.
Probably a good idea, as of today, is to follow Wayland compositor-drm.c implementation:
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/wayland/weston/tree/src/compositor-drm.c
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/kmscube/ is a good a reference implementation of OGL (or OGLES) hardware-accelerated rendering without an X11 or wayland dependency.
You can look at how Android has solved this issues. See Android-x86 project.
Android uses mesa with egl and opengles. Android has its own simple Gralloc component for mode setting and graphic allocations. On top of that they have SurfaceFlinger component which is a composition engine, which uses OpenGLES for acceleration.
Cannot see why couldn't you use these components in similar way and even reuse the Android glue code.
Related
I want to use OpenGL rendering without X, with google i find it: http://dvdhrm.wordpress.com/2012/08/11/kmscon-linux-kmsdrm-based-virtual-console/ there says that it is possible. I should use DRM and EGL. EGL can create opengl context but requires a NativeWindow. DRM probably will provide me NativeWindow, is not it? Should i use KMS? I know that i must have open source video driver. I want exactly OpenGL context, but not OpenGL ES (Linux). Maybe, someone knows tutorial or example code?
Yes, you need kms stack (example). Here is a simple example under linux, it use OpenGL es, But the step to have it working against OpenGL api are simple.
In the egl attribs set EGL_RENRERABLE_TYPE to EGL_OPENGL_BIT
And tell egl which api to bind to:
eglBindAPI(EGL_OPENGL_API);
Be sure to have latest kernel drivers and mesa-dev, libdrm-dev, libgbm-dev. This pieces of code is portable on android, it's just not so easy to have default android graphic stack silenced.
note: I had trouble with 32bit version, but still don't know why. those libs are actively developed, so not sure it wasn't a bug.
*note2: depending on your GLSL version, float precision is supported or not.
precision mediump float;
note3: if you have permision failure with /dev/dri/card0, grant it with:
sudo chmod 666 /dev/dri/card0
or add current user to video group with
sudo adduser $user video
you may also setguid for your executable with group set to video. (maybe best option)
I need to build a command line tool, that will take a 3D model as an argument, and will output photos of it, that may or may not be processed by this application. The tool will be deployed on Linux, but I want to make it as cross-platform as possible.
The program is not supposed to present a window of any kind, or accept any other input apart from the command line arguments.
I was wondering, how would someone approach this? I am currently able to display the 3D model on-screen with the help of GLFW, which actually drives my event handlers to peripheral input, and also my main loop. However, I don't know if using GLFW will help me if I want to make a command-line program with input-output as files.
Does anyone have any indications as to how to approach this?
create invisible/hidden window,
use its gl context to render to FBO and
use readpixels to save that to file
For OpenGL to work you need an OpenGL context. Which used to require some kind of windowing system active, that could produce you some drawable for which the context could be created.
Some OpenGL implementations, like Mesa, actually allow you to create an OpenGL context for drawables that are created without a windowing system; Mesa calls this "off-screen mesa". With Gallium3D drivers on Linux this even may give you GPU acceleration. But usually you end up in the "softpipe" software rasterizer.
Does anyone have any indications as to how to approach this?
Don't use OpenGL for it. OpenGL is mostly meant for creating interactive graphics; but of course if your goal is visualization of complex data, then a GPU would be better suited.
With NVidia hardware you'll need to use an X server for that; the X server must be running and active on the console for this to work. AMD hardware with the open source drivers and Mesa may give you off-screen capabilities without X (but I never tried that).
On Windows Server you don't have proper OpenGL support anyway (just v1.4 and very slow), so don't bother with it.
I was wondering if it would be possible to get graphical hardware acceleration without Xorg and its DDX driver, only with kernel module and the rest of userspace driver. I'm asking this because I'm starting to develop on an embedded platform (something like beagleboard or more roughly a Texas instruments ARM chip with integrated GPU), and I would get hardware acceleration without the overhead of a graphical server (that is not needed).
If yes, how? I was thinking about OpenGL or OpengGLES implementations, or Qt embedded http://harmattan-dev.nokia.com/docs/library/html/qt4/qt-embeddedlinux-accel.html
And TI provides a large documentation, but still is not clear to me
http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/Sitara_Linux_Software_Developer%E2%80%99s_Guide
Thank you.
The answer will depend on your user application. If everything is bare metal and your application team is writing everything, the DirectFB API can be used as Fredrik suggest. This might be especially interesting if you use the framebuffer version of GTK.
However, if you are using Qt, then this is not the best way forward. Qt5.0 does away with QWS (Qt embedded acceleration). Qt is migrating to LightHouse, now known as QPA. If you write a QPA plug-in that uses your graphics acceleration by whatever kernel mechanism you expose, then you have accelerated Qt graphics. Also of interest might be the Wayland architecture; there are QPA plug-ins for Wayland. Support exists for QPA in Qt4.8+ and Qt5.0+. Skia is also an interesting graphics API with support for an OpenGL backend; Skia is used by Android devices.
Getting graphics acceleration is easy. Do you want compositing? What is your memory foot print? Who is your developer audience that will program to the API? Do you need object functionality or just drawing primitives? There is a big difference between SKIA, PegUI, WindML and full blown graphics frameworks (Gtk, Qt) with all the widget and dynamics effects that people expect today. Programming to the OpenGL ES API might seem fine at first glance, but if your application has any complexity you will need a richer graphics framework; Mostly re-iterating Mats Petersson's comment.
Edit: From the Qt embedded acceleration link,
CPU blitter - slowest
Hardware blitter - Eg, directFB. Fast memory movement usually with bit ops as opposed to machine words, like DMA.
2D vector - OpenVG, Stick figure drawing, with bit manipulation.
3D drawing - OpenGL(ES) has polygon fills, etc.
This is the type of drawing you wish to perform. A framework like Qt and Gtk, give an API to put a radio button, checkbox, editbox, etc on the screen. It also has styling of the text and interaction with a keyboard, mouse and/or touch screen and other elements. A framework uses the drawing engine to put the objects on the screen.
Graphics acceleration is just putting algorithms like a Bresenham algorithm in a separate CPU or dedicated hardware. If the framework you chose doesn't support 3D objects, the frameworks is unlikely to need OpenGL support and may not perform any better.
The final piece of the puzzle is a window manager. Many embedded devices do not need this. However, many handset are using compositing and alpha values to create transparent windows and allow multiple apps to be seen at the same time. This may also influence your graphics API.
Additionally: DRI without X gives some compelling reasons why this might not be a good thing to do; for the case of a single user task, the DRI is not even needed.
The following is a diagram of a Wayland graphics stack a blog on Wayland.
This is depend on soc gpu driver implement ,
On iMX6 ,you can use wayland composite on framebuffer
I build a sample project as a reference
Qt with wayland on imx6D/Q
On omap3 there is a project
omap3 sgx wayland
I'm writing an app that heavily uses OpenGL; either on the Mac or on Linux.
I've heard of various rumors of Apple having buggy OpenGL drivers (and a reluctance to fix them). Can anyone confirm/deny this?
If you've developed on OpenGL on both Mac and Linux, how do they compare?
Thanks!
Looking at this list of Mac OS X games (which includes games like WoW and the upcoming StarCraft II) and the fact that Mac OS X itself uses OpenGL heavily for windows compositing and various eye candy makes this a highly dubious claim.
I don't believe they are buggy as such; merely poorly supported by Apple when something does actually go wrong in some way.
There are plenty of instances of things such as a low-end card from one manufacturer rendering much faster than a high-end card from another which can take a long time to get fixed if at all.
I am writing an OpenGL game which will hopefuflly be for both linux and iphoneOS, I basically want to be able to build using the OpenGL ES 1.5 headers and run it on my linux desktop. Can I do this? IE, I want to only use the subset of API calls common between OpenGL and OpenGL-ES.
Doing the above and linking with normal libGL.a from my system gets me my screen but I seem to be able to do nothing but change the scene background colour.
I've done exactly that, and it worked well for me.
There are a bunch OpenGL|ES extensions that aren't available on standard OpenGL but very nice to have on a low spec platform. glDrawTexImage is such an extension. Emulating these extensions using a hand full of desktop OpenGL-calls is not a big deal though.
Also OpenGL|ES supports the fixed-point data-format for most entrypoints. Take glClearColorx for example. These aren't available for the desktop OpenGL, so you have to write a wrapper if you want to use them. It's a bit more work if you also store your vertex data in this format.
Oh - and note that OpenGL|ES does not come with the glu-library. You can use it on the desktop, but if you do you'll have to reimplement them later (see the 100 questions about gluLookAt and gluUnproject).
There is no such thing as OpenGL ES 1.5. Did you mean 1.1 ?
Also, how do you get a window ? This is platform specific.
In any case, you still should compile against the header that corresponds to the lib you will link against. You don't know for sure what the header sets up (e.g. on windows, which you don't care about but still, calling conventions are specified in there).
There are also some calls that don't map well between the 2. E.g. APIs that are only using doubles in GL are float in GLES (from the ES spec):
The double-precision only commands
DepthRange, Frustum, and Ortho are
replaced with single-precision or
fixed-point variants
So in short, there is a bit more work than just using the same code, although the work in question is still minimal if you stick to GL ES subset.