Motivation - Write a program in C (and Assembly, if required) to color a rectangular area in the screen red.
STRICT requirements - GNU/Linux running with the bare minimum utilities and interfaces in text/console mode. So no X (or equivalent like Wayland/Mir), no non-default (outside POSIX, LSB, etc. provided by the kernel) library or interface and no extra assumptions except the presence of the device driver for the monitor.
Effectively, what I am looking for is information on how to write a program which will eventually send a signal through the VGA port and cable to the monitor to color a particular portion of the screen red.
Apologies if this sounds rude, but no "Why do you want to do this?" or "Why don't you use ABC library?" answer. I am trying to understand how to write an implementation of the X server or a kernel framebuffer (/dev/fb0) library for example. It is ok to provide a link to the source of a C library.
no extra assumptions except the presence of the device driver for the monitor.
That means you can use X or Wayland, because those are the graphics driver infrastructure on Linux.
Linux (the Kernel) by itself doesn't contain any graphics primitives. It provides some interfaces to talk to the GPU, allocate memory on it and configure the on-screen framebuffer. But except raw framebuffer memory access the Linux kernel does have no way to perform drawing operations. For that you need some infrastructure in userspace.
Wayland builds on top of DRI2, which in turn talks to the DRM Kernel-API. Then you require GPU dependent state tracker. Mesa has state trackers for a number of GPUs and provides OpenGL and OpenVG frontends.
The NVidia and ATI propiatary, closed source graphics drivers are designed to work with X only. So with those to make use of the GPU you must use X. That's the way it is.
Outside of that you can manipulate the on-screen framebuffer memory through /dev/fbdev, but that's mere pixel pushing, without any GPU acceleration.
Once upon a time we we had svgalib (or was it called vgalib?) which did exactly what you are trying to do. I would recomend that you look at its source code. I don't know if it is still possible to find it anywhere, or if it would actually work with a modern kernel. Just whatever you do, be prepared to reboot often.
For whatever it's worth, for any future viewers, I have found a decent tutorial at http://betteros.org/tut/graphics1.php. It goes through Framebuffer, DRI/DRM, and X Windows at "the lowest level possible" (basically ioctls and file read/write).
I have gotten both the Framebuffer and DRI/DRM examples to work on both QEMU Debian (on a MacOS Host) and a Raspberry Pi, with a bit of modification for the latter.
Related
I have a server with nvidia graphics card, and I want to run some openGL applications and xforwarding the display to client.
How can I achieve this? Currently I have not installed X window System yet.
X forwarding means, that all rendering commands are encapsulated into the X transport and transferred over to the machine with the display and executed there. The upside is, that the remote end does not require a GPU whatsoever. The downside is, that it consumes (well, rather gobbles up) lots of network bandwidth.
OpenGL up to version 2.1 specifies GLX opcodes for the X11 transport, so is network transparent. And if you make liberal use of display lists and keep the amount of data transferred small (i.e. no client side vertex array, only a few and little textures), OpenGL-over-GLX-over-X11-over-TCP works rather fine.
However these days it's more efficient to render remotely and only transfer the generated image using a high efficiency compression codec. Plain X11 forwarding can't do that, though. But you can do it using Xpra backed by a "true" X server, talking to an actual GPU. The problem is, that you'll need that particular X server to occupy the GPU.
A better method is, to detect if there's the GLX extension available, and if not if there's a GPU around and use that to render into a XSHM pixmap. That way also Xpra on a virtual framebuffer server will work. Unfortunately doing the later with OpenGL is annoyingly difficult to implement in a way, that it works transparently accross context creation APIs. It can be done (BT;DT) but actually for this kind of thing I actually prefer Vulkan, because despite Vulkan's verbosity it takes less work to do reliably with Vulkan than with OpenGL.
Maybe (unlikely) we'll see some X11 extension for compressed transfer of pixmaps, some high compression XV or similar. That, in combination with an pure off-screen, GPU rendering (we already have that), would make for a far more efficient system.
How can I draw a pixel array very fast in c++?
I've seen many questions like this on stackoverflow,
they are all answered with:
use gdi (windows)
use opengl
...
but there must be a way, how opengl is doing it!
I'm writing a little raytracer and need to draw every pixel
many times per second.
opengl is able to do it, platform independent and fast,
so how can i achieve that without opengl?
And "without opengl" dos not mean
use sdl (slow)
use this / that library
Please only suggest the platform native methods
or the library closest to that.
If it is possible (i know it is)
how can I do this?
platform independent solutions are preferred.
Drawing graphics on Linux you either have to use X11, or OpenGL. (And in the near future Wayland may be another option). In Linux there is no "native" way of doing graphics, because the Linux kernel doesn't care about graphics APIs. It provides a interfaces (DRM) using which graphics systems are then implemented in user space. If you just want to splat pixels on the screen, without caring about windows then you could also mmap /dev/fbdev – but you normally don't want that, because nobody wants his screen being clobbered by some program he can't move or hide.
Drawing single points is inefficient, no matter which API being uses, due to the protocol overhead.
So X11 it is. So the best bet is to use the MIT-SHM extension which you use to alter pixels in a buffer, which is then blitted in whole by the X11 server. Of course doing this using the pure X11 Xlib functions is annoyingly cumbersome. So this is what SDL effectively nicely wraps up for you.
The other option is OpenGL. OpenGL is not a library! It's a system level API, that gives you almost direct access to the GPU. And it integrates nicely with X11. Yes, the API is provided through a library that's being loaded, but technically that library is just a "wrapper" or "interface" to the actual driver. Drawing single points with OpenGL makes no sense. But you can "batch up" several points into a list (using a vertex array) and then process that list. So the idea is to collect all the incoming points between two display refresh intervals and draw them in one single batch.
platform independent solutions are preferred.
Why are you asking about native APIs then? By definition there can be no plattform independent native API. Either you're native, or you're plattform independent.
And in your particular scenario I think SDL would be the best solution, because it offers just the right kind of abstraction and program side interface for a raytracer. Just FYI: Virtual Machines like QEmu use SDL.
Or you use OpenGL which is a real plattform neutral API widely supported.
Drawing graphics on Linux you either have to use X11, or OpenGL.
This is absolutely false! Counterexample: there's platforms that don't run X11, yet they display pixels (eg. fonts).
Sidenote. OpenGL usually depends on X11 (it's possible, albeit hard, to run OpenGL without X11).
As #datenwork says, there's at least 2 other ways to draw pixels:
The framebuffer device (fbdev), an abstraction to interface with graphics hardware. Very old, designed by Martin Schaller, see the kernel docs. Source code is here. Also see here. Here's the simplest possible framebuffer driver.
The Direct Rendering Manager (DRM), a kernel subsystem that provides an API for userland apps to send commands/data directly to the GPU. (Seems suspiciously similar to what OpenGL does, but idk!). Source code is here. Here's a DRM example that inititializes a simple display pipeline.
Both of these are part of the kernel, so they're lower-level than X11, which is not part of the kernel. Both can draw arbitrary pixels (eg. penguins). I'd guess both of these are platform-independent (like OpenGL).
See this for more on how to draw stuff on Linux.
I just can't find them anywhere. The most important part for me is the hardware acceleration, and I have no idea if there is a performance or openGL version compatibility requirement that the video card has to follow.
The minimum system requirements will depend alot more on the application that you are writing than what SDL2 does.
If you just create a standard window and render SDL will use what it can find and what it thinks is best either OpenGL, OpenGL ES, Direct3D or use the old style software rendering for machines that can't do any of the other. So if a computer can support an OS that SDL runs on then you will almost always (I just said almost since there can possible be exceptions) be able to run these type of apps (Video card not a requirement, but having one will greatly increase programs drawing speed).
You can also be creating a OpenGL application directly and then it depends on what type of context you are making what the video card has to support.
You can find most of the information here: http://wiki.libsdl.org/moin.fcg/MigrationGuide
under the Video section. It's actually how to port from 1.2 to 2.0 , but it explains the new Video Pipeline pretty well.
Hope thats what you were looking for.
This question already has answers here:
Closed 10 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
How does OpenGL work at the lowest level?
When we make a program that uses the OpenGL library, for example for the Windows platform and have a graphics card that supports OpenGL, what happens is this:
We developed our program in a programming language linking the graphics with OpenGL (eg Visual C++).
Compile and link the program for the target platform (eg Windows)
When you run the program, as we have a graphics card that supports OpenGL, the driver installed on the same Windows will be responsible for managing the same graphics. To do this, when the CPU will send the required data to the chip on the graphics card (eg NVIDIA GPU) sketch the results.
In this context, we talk about graphics acceleration and downloaded to the CPU that the work of calculating the framebuffer end of our graphic representation.
In this environment, when the driver of the GPU receives data, how leverages the capabilities of the GPU to accelerate the drawing? Translates instructions and data received CUDA language type to exploit parallelism capabilities? Or just copy the data received from the CPU in specific areas of the device memory? Do not quite understand this part.
Finally, if I had a card that supports OpenGL, does the driver installed in Windows detect the problem? Would get a CPU error or would you calculate our framebuffer?
You'd better work into computer gaming sites. They frequently give articles on how 3D graphics works and how "artefacts" present themselves in case of errors in games or drivers.
You can also read article on architecture of 3D libraries like Mesa or Gallium.
Overall drivers have a set of methods for implementing this or that functionality of Direct 3D or OpenGL or another standard API. When they are loading, they check the hardware. You can have cheap videocard or expensive one, recent one or one released 3 years ago... that is different hardware. So drivers are trying to map each API feature to an implementation that can be used on given computer, accelerated by GPU, accelerated by CPU like SSE4, or even some more basic implementation.
Then driver try to estimate GPU load. Sometimes function can be accelerated, yet the GPU (especially low-end ones) is alreay overloaded by other task, then it maybe would try to calculate on CPU instead of waiting for GPU time slot.
When you make mistake there is always several variants, depending on intelligence and quality of driver.
Maybe driver would fix the error for you, ignoring your commands and running its own set of them instead.
Maybe the driver would return to your program some error code
Maybe the driver would execute the command as is. If you issued painting wit hred colour instead of green - that is an error, but the kind that driver can not know about. Search for "3d artefacts" on PC gaming related sites.
In worst case your eror would interfere with error in driver and your computer would crash and reboot.
Of course all those adaptive strategies are rather complex and indeterminate, that causes 3D drivers be closed and know-how of their internals closely guarded.
Search sites dedicated to 3D gaming and perhaps also to 3D modelling - they should rate videocards "which are better to buy" and sometimes when they review new chip families they compose rather detailed essays about technical internals of all this.
To question 5.
Some of the things that a driver does: It compiles your GPU programs (vertex,fragment, etc. shaders) to the machine instructions of the specific card, uploads the compiled programs to the appropriate area of the device memory and arranges the programs to be executed in parallel on the many many graphics cores on the card.
It uploads the graphics data (vertex coordinates, textures, etc.) to the appropriate type of graphics card memory, using various hints from the programmer, for example whether the date is frequently, infrequently, or not at all updated.
It may utilize special units in the graphics card for transfer of data to/from host memory, for example some nVidia card have a DMA unit (some Quadro card may have two or more), which can upload, for example, textures in parallel with the usual driver operation (other transfers, drawing, etc).
Ok, I know that online there are millions of answers to what OpenGL is, but I'm trying to figure out what it is in terms of a file on my computer. I've researched and found that OpenGL acts as a multi-platform translator for different computer graphics cards. So, then, is it a dll?
I was wondering, if it's a dll, then couldn't I download any version of the dll (preferably the latest), and then use it, knowing what it has?
EDIT: Ok, so if it's a windows dll, and I make an OpenGL game that uses a late version, what if it's not supported on someone else's computer with an earlier version? Am I allowed to carry the dll with my game so that it's supported on other windows computers? Or is the dll set up to communicate with the graphics card strictly on specific computers?
OpenGL is constantly being updated (whatever it is). How can this be done if all it's doing is communicating with a graphics card on a bunch of different computers that have graphics cards that are never going to be updated since they're built in?
There are two "parts" to OpenGL - the specification that's updated by the Khronos Group once every few months, and the driver that's written by your graphics card manufacturer specifically for your graphics card model.
The OpenGL specification essentially details how everything about the OpenGL API should work - what the expected behavior should be, when something is considered unexpected behavior, when to throw which errors, etc. The specification lets the driver writers know exactly what they need to do and lets application writers know what to expect from a driver. This is what OpenGL really "is" - the glue that holds applications and drivers together. You can read all the specifications for each version here.
Then there's drivers that implement the OpenGL API and are considered compliant to the specification. The driver does exactly what you'd expect it to do - copy data to and from the graphics card's memory, write data to graphics card registers, keep track of state, process vertices, compile shaders, instruct hundreds of stream processors to simultaneously transform vertices and fill pixels, etc. Without OpenGL, each graphics card model would have a separate, slightly faster API that would only work for that one graphics card because of the way it was structured. With OpenGL, the drivers are all written against the same API and an application's code will run on all graphics cards.
Compliance to the OpenGL specification doesn't change with driver updates. Most driver updates will either fix minor bugs or do some internal optimizing.
I know at one point there was a small bug with ATI driver where you had to call glEnable(GL_TEXTURE_2D); before you could generate mipmaps the OpenGL 3 way (glGenerateMipMaps()) despite GL_TEXTURE_2D being deprecated as a possible value for glEnable(). I'm not sure if it's fixed now, but it's certainly the type of edge case that can easily be overlooked by driver writers.
As for optimizations, there's a lot to optimize. Maybe there's another way to optimize shaders when they're being compiled, maybe there's a more efficient way to distribute work between the stream processors, I don't know.
OpenGL is a cross-platform API for graphics programming. In terms of compiled code, it will be available as an OS-specific library - e.g. a DLL (opengl32.dll) in Windows, or an SO in Linux.
You can get the SDK and binary redistributables from OpenGL.org
Depending on which language you're using, there may be OpenGL wrappers available. These are classes or API libraries designed to specifically work with your language. For example, there are .NET OpenGL wrappers available for C# / VB.NET developers. A quick Google search on the subject should give you some results.
The OpenGL API occasionally has new versions released, but these updates are backwards-compatible in nature. Moreover, new features are generally added as extensions, and it's possible to detect which extensions are present and only use those which are locally available and supported... so you can build your software to take advantage of new features when they're available but still be able to run when they aren't.
The API has nothing to do with individual drivers -- drivers can be updated without changing the API, and so the fact that drivers are constantly updated does not matter for purposes of compatibility with your software. On that account, you can choose an API version to develop against, and as long as your target operating systems ships with a version of the OpenGL library compatible with that API, you don't need to worry about driver updates breaking your software's ability to be dynamically linked against the locally available libraries.