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.
Related
I'm learning OpenGL under X11 with xcb and I'm having a hard time figuring out the difference between visuals and fbconfigs (the ones you find in glxinfo)
As far as I could see a visual is a set of properties related to depth buffer, stencil buffer, framebuffer, etc.. what's the difference with fbconfigs and why would one be preferable to the other?
In the X Window System a Visual encapsulates the color mapping (color type, color depth) for a Display. The same Display can be configured with different Visuals.
When OpenGL was born, about a decade after X System, a structure XVisualInfo was created in the OGL part, not in the X System. This new structure extended the Visual type by adding more features, such as ancillary buffers, double buffer, and stereo. This XVisualInfo was used to create the gl-context.
In 1998 the GLX 1.3 specification (find it at Khronos page), added more features, notably GLXPbuffer for off-screen rendering, but easier than GLXPixmap. Also added were transparency, multi-sampling, and samples buffers. The configuration for the GLXDrawable (Window or GLXPixmap, or now also GLXWindow and GLXPbuffer) was going too different from the Visual abilities, and so GLXFBConfig was introduced.
The current GLX 1.4 specification allows, for backwards compatibility reasons and if you don't use GLX>1.2 features, the use of XVisualInfo. But the prefered way of creating a context is by GLXFBConfig.
Notice that rendering to a GLXPbuffer does not use a X Visual. Notice also that using Framebuffer objects since OGL 3.0 makes obsolete the use of GLXPbuffer.
The visual is a concept of X11 itself. It describes the color encoding properties. A particular X11 server my supper a set of different visuals, and and X11 client (graphical application) may choose one that is best suited for it's use case. Every X11 window is created with respect to one visual. See the documentation about X11 visual types for details.
On an X11 server with the glX extension, there are a couple of such visuals which provide hardware accelerated rendering via OpenGL. Before you can create a X11 window which you're going to use for GL rendering, you need to query a suitable visual. In traditional glX, you would use for example glXChooseVisual to do that.
A GLXFBConfig on the other hand is a entity that is only relevant for GLX itself, the classical X server does not know anything about it. GLXFBconfigs can be used to create off-screen rendering buffers called P-Buffers (which are kind of obsolete nowadays, though).
One could classify FBConfigs into two groups:
GLXFBConfigs which you can use to create a X11 window with. In this case, the FBConfig refers to some X11 visual ID, and you can use glXGetVisualFromFBConfig to query that.
GLXFBConfigs which can solely be used for off-screen rendering. There is no associated visual ID, so you cannot use these to create X11 windows with.
FBConfigs provide a newer and more flexible interface via glxChooseFBConfig, so it is preferable alwyas to use the FBConfig API, even if you want an off-screen window.
What a typical GL implementation will do is to provide an FBconfig for each visual type it is supporting, so you should find those twice in the glxinfo output: as the actual visuals, and as more or less identical fbconfigs. Additionally, it will offer some more fbconfigs with formats which would be untypical for X11 windows (like more than 32bit color depth).
I have two monitors, each connected to a different GPU. Both GPUs are in a single machine, and I want to run a single application. I have two independent views, and I would like to render each one using a GPU/Monitor set. I can create multiple surfaces and devices, but I want to ensure I associate each surface with the GPU its monitor is plugged into, otherwise I suspect I'll suffer performance issues as the frame buffers need to be copied back and forth between cards.
I'm using fullscreen surfaces, and I was thinking this was something vkGetPhysicalDeviceSurfaceSupportKHR would tell me. However, both VkSurfaceKHR appear to be valid targets for each VkPhysicalDevice so I guess this is something the OS and GPU Driver can handle, but is there any hint about which surface is optimal to associate with a device?
From what I can tell the extension VK_KHR_display is one way of doing this, but it's not available on my Windows 10 machine or Nvidia GPU. It seems to be intended for embedded platforms only. However it lets you list attached displays for each device which is pretty much what I'm looking for: https://vulkan.lunarg.com/doc/view/1.0.30.0/linux/vkspec.chunked/ch29s03.html
This quote from the docs makes me belive this may not be supported on Windows:
Issues
1) Does Win32 need a way to query for compatibility between a particular physical device and a specific screen? Compatibility between a physical device and a window generally only depends on what screen the window is on. However, there is not an obvious way to identify a screen without already having a window on the screen.
RESOLVED: No. While it may be useful, there is not a clear way to do this on Win32. However, a method was added to query support for presenting to the windows desktop as a whole.
However, I'm still interested in hearing if there's a work around to achieve a similar effect.
Finally figured out a work around for this:
Direct X actually supports this through use of the IDXGIAdapter::EnumOutputs function. This lets you list the monitors connected to each GPU. Then using these two extensions you can remap this information to Vulkan:
VK_KHR_external_memory_capabilities
VK_KHR_get_physical_device_properties2
You can use these to get the deviceLUID from VkPhysicalDeviceIDPropertiesKHR.
This can then be compared with the Luid from this structure in Direct X DXGI_ADAPTER_DESC
You can also use glfwGetWin32Window to get the HWND of the monitor. This lets you associate a vulkan surface with a direct x monitor.
You now have all the information you need to accociate vulkan surfaces with the devices they're actually connected to.
At least in my application, setting this up correctly results in a significant difference in performance.
This would all be way simpler (and cross platform) if Windows would just support the VK_KHR_display and VK_KHR_display_swapchain extensions as Linux does.
There are two extensions that are useful for such things: the one mentioned by You, VK_KHR_display and the second called VK_KHR_display_swapchain which allows You to create a swapchain directly on a device’s display without any underlying window system.
But these extensions are rarely supported on Windows. In core Vulkan API there is no way to achieve what You want. And I'm afraid You need to use OS-specific functions (You need to rely on the WinAPI functions in this situation).
[EDIT]
Did You saw this question? How can you get the display adapter used for a particular monitor in Windows? If not, maybe it will help You start with Your research.
As you already discovered, on Win32 you need to use the OS windowing system to pick the display you want to use, using the Window API. It can be straight forward.
BUT if you intend to make simple and agnostic OS code, check GLFW project. It has high level functions to handle windows on all major OSs.
Check :
GLFW monitor Guide
GLFW Vulkan integration
GLFW on its own words:
GLFW is a free, Open Source, multi-platform library for OpenGL, OpenGL ES and Vulkan application development. It provides a simple, platform-independent API for creating windows, contexts and surfaces, reading input, handling events, etc.
I want to create a framework for automated rendering tests for video games.
I want to test an application that normally renders to a window with OpenGL. Instead, I want it to render into image files for further evaluation. I want to do this on a Linux server with no GPU.
How can I do this with minimal impact on the evaluated application?
Some remarks for clarity:
The OpenGL version is 2.1, so software rendering with Mesa should be possible.
Preferably, I don't want to change any of the application code. If there is a solution that allows me to emulate a X server or something like that, I would prefer it.
I don't want to change any of the rendering code. If it is really necessary, I can change the way I initialize OpenGL, but after that, I want to execute arbitrary OpenGL code.
Ideally, your answer would explain how to set up an environment on a headless Linux server that allows me to start arbitrary OpenGL binaries and render its output into images. If that's not possible, I am open for any suggestions.
Use Xvfb for your X server. The installation of Mesa deployed on any modern Linux distribution should automatically fall back to software rasterization if no supported GPU is found. You can take screenshots with any X11 screen grabber program; heck even ffmpeg -i x11grab will work.
fbdev/miniglx might be something that you are looking for. http://www.mesa3d.org/fbdev-dri.html I haven't used it so I have no idea if it works for your purpose or not.
Alternative is to just start and xserver without any desktop environment with xinit. That setup is using well tested code paths making it better suited for running your test. miniglx might have bugs which none has noticed because it isn't used everyday.
To capture the rendering output to images could be done with LD_PRELOAD trick to wrap glXSwapBuffers. Basic idea is to add your own swapbuffers function in between your application and gl library where you can use glReadPixels to download rendered frame and then use your favorite image library to write that data to image/video files. After the glReadPixels has completed you can call to library glXSwapBuffers to make swap happen like it would happen in real desktop.
The prog subdirectory has been removed from main git repository and you can find it from git://anongit.freedesktop.org/git/mesa/demos instead.
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 woud like to create a cross-platform drawing program. The one requirement for writing my app is that I have pixel level precision over the canvas. For instance, I want to write my own line drawing algorithm rather than rely on someone elses. I do not want any form of anti-aliasing (again, pixel level control is required.) I would like the users interactions on the screen to be quick and responsive (pending my ability to write fast algorithms.)
Ideally, I would like to write this in Python, or perhaps Java as a second choice. The ability to easily make the final app cross-platform is a must. I will submit to different API's on different OS'es if necessary as long as I can write an abstraction layer around them. Any ideas?
addendum: I need the ability to draw on-screen. Drawing out to a file I've got figured out.
I just this week put together some slides and demo code for doing 2d graphics using OpenGL from python using the library pyglet. Here's a representative post: Pyglet week 2, better vertex throughput (or 3D stuff using the same basic ideas)
It is very fast (relatively speaking, for python) I have managed to get around 1,000 independently positioned and oriented objects moving around the screen, each with about 50 vertices.
It is very portable, all the code I have written in this environment works on windows and Linux and mac (and even obscure environments like Pypy) without me ever having to think about it.
Some of these posts are very old, with broken links between them. You should be able to find all the relevant posts using the 'graphics' tag.
The Pyglet library for Python might suit your needs. It lets you use OpenGL, a cross-platform graphics API. You can disable anti-aliasing and capture regions of the screen to a buffer or a file. In addition, you can use its event handling, resource loading, and image manipulation systems. You can probably also tie it into PIL (Python Image Library), and definitely Cairo, a popular cross-platform vector graphics library.
I mention Pyglet instead of pure PyOpenGL because Pyglet handles a lot of ugly OpenGL stuff transparently with no effort on your part.
A friend and I are currently working on a drawing program using Pyglet. There are a few quirks - for example, OpenGL is always double buffered on OS X, so we have to draw everything twice, once for the current frame and again for the other frame, since they are flipped whenever the display refreshes. You can look at our current progress in this subversion repository. (Splatterboard.py in trunk is the file you'll want to run.) If you're not up on using svn, I would be happy to email you a .zip of the latest source. Feel free to steal code if you look into it.
If language choice is open, a Flash file created with Haxe might have a place. Haxe is free, and a full, dynamic programming language. Then there's the related Neko, a virtual machine (like Java's, Ruby's, Parrot...) to run on Mac, Windows and Linux. Being in some ways a new improved form of Flash, naturally it can draw stuff. http://haxe.org/
QT's Canvas an QPainter are very good for this job if you'd like to use C++. and it is cross platform.
There is a python binding for QT but I've never used it.
As for Java, using SWT, pixel level manipulation of a canvas is somewhat difficult and slow so I would not recommend it. On the other hand Swing's Canvas is pretty good and responsive. I've never used the AWT option but you probably don't want to go there.
I would recommend wxPython
It's beautifully cross platform and you can get per pixel control and if you change your mind about that you can use it with libraries such as pyglet or agg.
You can find some useful examples for just what you are trying to do in the docs and demos download.