I'm coding a small rendering engine with GLSL shaders:
Each Mesh (well, submesh) has a number of vertex streams (eg. position,normal,texture,tangent,etc) into one big VBO and a MaterialID.
Each Material has a set of textures and properties (eg. specular-color, diffuse-color, color-texture, normal-map,etc)
Then I have a GLSL shader, with it's uniforms and attributes. Let's say:
uniform vec3 DiffuseColor;
uniform sampler2D NormalMapTexture;
attribute vec3 Position;
attribute vec2 TexCoord;
I'm a little bit stuck in trying to design a way for the GLSL shader to define the stream mappings (semantics) for the attributes and uniforms, and then bind the vertex streams to the appropriate attributes.
Something in the lines of saying to the mesh :"put your position stream in attribute "Position" and your tex coordinates in "TexCoord". Also put your material's diffuse color in "DiffuseColor" and your material's second texture in "NormalMapTexture"
At the moment I am using hard-coded names for the attributes (ie. vertex pos is always "Position" ,etc) and checking each uniform and attribute name to understand what the shader is using it for.
I guess I'm looking for some way of creating a "vertex declaration", but including uniforms and textures too.
So I'm just wondering how people do this in large-scale rendering engines.
Edit:
Recap of suggested methods:
1. Attribute/Uniform semantic is given by the name of the variable
(what I'm doing now)
Using pre-defined names for each possible attribute.The GLSL binder will query the name for each attribute and link the vertex array based on the name of the variable:
//global static variable
semantics (name,normalize,offset) = {"Position",false,0} {"Normal",true,1},{"TextureUV,false,2}
...when linking
for (int index=0;index<allAttribs;index++)
{
glGetActiveAttrib(program,index,bufSize,length,size[index],type[index],name);
semantics[index]= GetSemanticsFromGlobalHardCodedList(name);
}
... when binding vertex arrays for render
for (int index=0;index<allAttribs;index++)
{
glVertexAttribPointer(index,size[index],type[index],semantics[index]->normalized,bufferStride,semantics[index]->offset);
}
2. Predefined locations for each semantic
GLSL binder will always bind the vertex arrays to the same locations.It is up to the shader to use the the appropriate names to match. (This seems awfully similar to method 1, but unless I misunderstood, this implies binding ALL available vertex data, even if the shader does not consume it)
.. when linking the program...
glBindAttribLocation(prog, 0, "mg_Position");
glBindAttribLocation(prog, 1, "mg_Color");
glBindAttribLocation(prog, 2, "mg_Normal");
3. Dictionary of available attributes from Material, Engine globals, Renderer and Mesh
Maintain list of availlable attributes published by the active Material, the Engine globals, the current Renderer and the current Scene Node.
eg:
Material has (uniformName,value) = {"ambientColor", (1.0,1.0,1.0)}, {"diffuseColor",(0.2,0.2,0.2)}
Mesh has (attributeName,offset) = {"Position",0,},{"Normals",1},{"BumpBlendUV",2}
then in shader:
uniform vec3 ambientColor,diffuseColo;
attribute vec3 Position;
When binding the vertex data to the shader, the GLSL binder will loop over the attribs and bind to the one found (or not? ) in the dictionary:
for (int index=0;index<allAttribs;index++)
{
glGetActiveAttrib(program,index,bufSize,length,size[index],type[index],name);
semantics[index] = Mesh->GetAttributeSemantics(name);
}
and the same with uniforms, only query active Material and globals aswell.
Attributes:
Your mesh has a number of data streams. For each stream you can keep the following info: (name, type, data).
Upon linking, you can query the GLSL program for active attributes and form an attribute dictionary for this program. Each element here is just (name, type).
When you draw a mesh with a specified GLSL program, you go through programs attribute dictionary and bind the corresponding mesh streams (or reporting an error in case of inconsistency).
Uniforms:
Let the shader parameter dictionary be the set of (name, type, data link). Typically, you can have the following dictionaries:
Material (diffuse,specular,shininess,etc) - taken from the material
Engine (camera, model, lights, timers, etc) - taken from engine singleton (global)
Render (custom parameters related to the shader creator: SSAO radius, blur amount, etc) - provided exclusively by the shader creator class (render)
After linking, the GLSL program is given a set of parameter dictionaries in order to populate it's own dictionary with the following element format: (location, type, data link). This population is done by querying the list of active uniforms and matching (name, type) pair with the one in dictionaries.
Conclusion:
This method allows for any custom vertex attributes and shader uniforms to be passed, without hard-coded names/semantics in the engine. Basically only the loader and render know about particular semantics:
Loader fills out the mesh data streams declarations and materials dictionaries.
Render uses a shader that is aware of the names, provides additional parameters and selects proper meshes to be drawn with.
From my experience, OpenGL does not define the concept of attributes or uniforms semantics.
All you can do is define your own way of mapping your semantics to OpenGL variables, using the only parameter you can control about these variables: their location.
If you're not constrained by platform issues, you could try to use the 'new' GL_ARB_explicit_attrib_location (core in OpenGL 3.3 if I'm not mistaken) that allows shaders to explicitly express which location is intended for which attribute. This way, you can hardcode (or configure) which data you want to bind on which attribute location, and query the shaders' locations after it's compiled. It seems that this feature is not yet mature, and perhaps subject to bugs in various drivers.
The other way around is to bind the locations of your attributes using glBindAttribLocation. For this, you have to know the names of the attributes that you want to bind, and the locations you want to assign them.
To find out the names used in a shader, you can:
query the shader for active attributes
parse the shader source code to find them yourself
I would not recommend using the GLSL parsing way (although it may suit your needs if you're in simple enough contexts): the parser can easily be defeated by the preprocessor. Supposing that your shader code becomes somewhat complex, you may want to start using #includes, #defines, #ifdef, etc. Robust parsing supposes that you have a robust preprocessor, which can become quite a heavy lift to set up.
Anyway, with your active attributes names, you have to assign them locations (and/or semantics), for this, you're alone with your use case.
In our engine, we happily hardcode locations of predefined names to specific values, such as:
glBindAttribLocation(prog, 0, "mg_Position");
glBindAttribLocation(prog, 1, "mg_Color");
glBindAttribLocation(prog, 2, "mg_Normal");
...
After that, it's up to the shader writer to conform to the predefined semantics of the attributes.
AFAIK it's the most common way of doing things, OGRE uses it for example. It's not rocket science but works well in practice.
If you want to add some control, you could provide an API to define the semantics on a shader basis, perhaps even having this description in an additional file, easily parsable, living near the shader source code.
I don't get into uniforms where the situation is almost the same, except that the 'newer' extensions allow you to force GLSL uniform blocks to a memory layout that is compatible with your application.
I'm not satisfied by all this myself, so I'll be happy to have some contradictory information :)
You may want to consider actually parsing the GLSL itself.
The uniform/attribute declaration syntax is pretty simple. You can come up with a small manual parser that looks for lines that start with uniform or attribute, get the type and name and then expose some C++ API using strings. This will save you the trouble of hard coded names. If you don't want to get your hands dirty with manual parsing a couple of likes of Spirit would do the trick.
You probably won't want to fully parse GLSL so you'll need to make sure you don't do anything funny in the decelerations that might alter the actual meaning. One complication that comes to mind is conditional compilation using macros in the GLSL.
Related
I am learning OpenGL and trying to get grasp of the best practices. I am working on a simple demonstration project in C++ which however aims to be a bit more generic and better structured (not everything just put in main()) than most of the tutorials I have seen on the web. I want to use the modern OpenGL ways which means VAOs and shaders. My biggest concern is about the relation of VAOs and shader programs. Maybe I am missing something here.
I am now thinking about the best design. Consider the following scenario:
there is a scene which contains multiple objects
each object has its individual size, position and rotation (i.e. transform matrix)
each object has a certain basic shape (e.g. box, ball), there can be multiple objects of the same shape
there can be multiple shader programs (e.g. one with plain interpolated RGBA colors, another with textures)
This leads me to the basic three components of my design:
ShaderProgram class - each instance contains a vertex shader and fragment shader (initialized from given strings)
Object class - has transform matrix and reference to a shape instance
Shape base class - and derived classes e.g. BoxShape, SphereShape; each derived class knows how to generate its mesh and turn it into buffer and how to map it to vertex attributes, in other words it will initialize its own VAO; it also known which glDraw... function(s) to use to render itself
When a scene is being rendered, I will call glUseProgram(rgbaShaderProgram). Then I will go through all objects which can be rendered using this program and render them. Then I will switch to glUseProgram(textureShaderProgram) and go through all textured objects.
When rendering an individual object:
1) I will call glUniformMatrix4fv() to set the individual transformation matrix (of course including projection matrix etc.)
2) then I will call the shape to which the object is associated to render
3) when shape is redered, it will bind its VAO, call its specific glDraw...() function and then unbind VAO
In my design I wanted to uncouple the dependency between Shape and ShaderProgram as they in theory can be interchangeable. But still some dependency seems to be there. When generating vertices in a specific ...Shape class and setting buffers for them I already need to know that I for example need to generate texture coordinates rather than RGBA components for each vertex. And when setting vertex attribute pointers glVertexAttribPointer I already must know that the shader program will use for example floats rather than integers (otherwise I would have to call glVertexAttribIPointer). I also need to know which attribute will be at which location in the shader program. In other words I am mixing the responsibility for sole shape geometry and the prior knowledge about how it will be rendered. And as a consequence of this I cannot render a shape with a shader program which is not compatible with it.
So finally my question: how to improve my design to achieve the goal (render the scene) and at the same time keep the versatility (interchangeability of shaders and shapes), force the correct usage (not to allow mixing wrong shapes with incompatible shaders), have the best performance possible (avoid unnecessarry program or context switching) and maintain good design principles (one class - one responsibility).
What I would do, is prepare ShaderProgram(s) templates, which I adapt to VAO attributes.
After all, shader programs are text, initially. What you might do is write your main functions for vertex and fragment programs, and attach the "header" to them, depending on the bound VAO. It could be useful to use standardized names for the variables you use inside the shaders, such as InPos, InNor, InTan, InTex.
That way, you can scan for elements that are missing in the VAO, but used inside the shader, and simply appending them in the header as const value with some default setting.
I do this via ShaderManager, with RequestShader(template,VAO) kind of function, which adapts the template to the VAO, and caches the compiled shader for later use.
If another VAO has the same attributes, and requires the same template, the precompiled cached version is returned to avoid the same adaptation process.
I want to make a couple of vec4 vertex attributes in my shaders. I've done quite a bit of googling, but I can't seem to find consistent information for specifically what I want to do.
My goal here is to move skinning to the GPU, so I need a list of bones and weights per vertex, hence why I want to use vertex attributes. I have 2 arrays of floats that represent this data. Basically this:
weightsBuffer = new float[vSize*4];
indexesBuffer = new int[vSize*4];
The part that I can't consistently find is how to upload these and use them in the shader. To be clear, I don't want to upload all the position, normal and texture coordinate data, I'm already using display lists and have decided to keep using them for a few reasons that aren't relevant. How can I create the buffers and bind them properly so I can use them?
Thanks.
Binding your bone weights and indices is no different of a process than binding your position data. Assuming the data is generated properly in your buffers, you use glBindAttribLocation to bind the attribute index in your vertex stream to your shader variable, and glVertexAttribPointer to define your vertex array (and don't forget glEnableVertexAttribArray).
The exact code may vary, depending on whether you're using VAOs and VBOs (or just client buffers). If you want a more specific answer, you should provide your code and shader.
I have GLSL compute shader. Very simple one. I specify input texture and output image, mapped to the texture.
layout (binding=2) uniform sampler2D srcTex;
layout (binding=5, r32f) writeonly uniform image2D destTex;
In my code, I need to call glBindImageTexture to attach texture to image. Now, first parameter of this function is
unit
Specifies the index of the image unit to which to bind the texture
I know, that I can set this value to 5 from code manually, but how to do this automatically.
If I create shader I use refraction to get variable names and its locations.
How can I get binding ID?
How can I get texture format from layout (r32f) to set it in my code automatically?
If I create shader I use refraction to get variable names and its locations.
I think you mean reflection and not refraction, assuming you mean the programming language concept.
Now, the interesting thing here is that image2D and sampler2D are what are known as opaque types in GLSL (handles to an image unit). Ordinarily, you could use the modern glGetProgramResource* (...) API (GL_ARB_program_interface_query or core in 4.3) to query really detailed information about uniforms, buffers, etc. in a GLSL shader. However, opaque types are not considered program resources by GLSL and are not compatible with that feature - the information you want is related to the image unit the uniform references and not the uniform itself.
How can I get binding ID?
This is fairly straight-forward.
You can call glGetUniformiv (...) to get the value assigned to your image2D. On the GL-side of things opaque uniforms work no differently than any other uniform (for assigning and querying values), but in GLSL you cannot assign a value to an opaque data type using the = operator. That is why the layout (binding = ...) semantics were created, they allow you to assign the binding in the shader itself rather than having to call an API function and are completely optional.
How can I get texture format from layout (r32f) to set it in my code automatically?
That is not currently possible, and in the future may become irrelevant for loads (it already is for stores). You do not technically need an exact match here. As long as image format size / class match, you can do an image load no problem.
In truth, the only reason you have to declare the format in GLSL is so that the return format for imageLoad (...) is known at compile-time (that makes it irrelevant for writeonly qualified images). There is an EXT extension right now (GL_EXT_shader_image_load_formatted) that completely eliminates the need to establish the image format for non-writeonly images.
Even for non-writeonly images, since only the size / class need to match, I do not think you really need this. r32f has an image class of 1x32 and a size of 32, but the fact that it is floating-point is not relevant to anything. Thus, what you might really consider is naming your uniforms by their image class instead - call this uniform something like destTex_1x32 and it will be obvious that it's a 1-component 32-bit image.
Im trying to implement modern OpenGL, but the problem is: most tutorials are based on 3.3+, and talk about GLSL 330, I only have GLSL 130. Therefore, many things are apparently different, since my VBO's do not work.
Could you give me general hints or a tutorial that explains how to use GLSL 130 with VBO's? In my case, I have the vbo loaded, but when I use my shader program, only vertices called with glVertex get rendered, it's like the vbo gets ignored (no input). How to solve this?
And can you use VBO's without shaders? I tried to do that, but it crashed...
Yes, VBOs can still be used in GLSL 130, and can still be used even without shaders. The purpose of the VBO is to hold the vertex attributes for drawing. Most up to date tutorials I've seen have you use the layout position specifier for indicating how to address the different attributes in your shader, i.e.
layout(location = 0) in vec3 Position;
This isn't supported in GLSL 130, so you have to have another way of relating the attribute with the VBO. It's pretty simple... you can use glBindAttribLocation or glGetAttribLocation. Calling glGetAttribLocation will give you the identifier you need to use in glVertexAttribPointer to associate the VBO data with the particular attribute. You can call this at any time after the program has been compiled. In addition, you can call glBindAttribLocation to specifically set the identifier that will be associated with a given attribute name if you call it after you've created the program object but before you link the shaders. This is handy because it lets you decide for yourself what the location should be, just as you would be able to with the layout specifier.
Finally, if you want to use a VBO without using a shader at all, then you still have to find a way of associating the data in the VBO with the various inputs that the fixed function pipeline expects. This is done using a now deprecated method called glEnableClientState() and glVertexPointer(), which together let you tell OpenGL what fixed function pipeline attribute you're going to populate, and how it can find the data in the VBO.
I have been reading this OpenGL4.1 new features review.I don't really understand the idea behind GL_ARB_separate_program_objects usage , at least based on how the post author puts it:
It allows to independently use shader stages without changing others
shader stages. I see two mains reasons for it: Direct3D, Cg and even
the old OpenGL ARB program does it but more importantly it brings some
software design flexibilities allowing to see the graphics pipeline at
a lower granularity. For example, my best enemy the VAO, is a
container object that links buffer data, vertex layout data and GLSL
program input data. Without a dedicated software design, this means
that when I change the material of an object (a new fragment shader),
I need different VAO... It's fortunately possible to keep the same VAO
and only change the program by defining a convention on how to
communicate between the C++ program and the GLSL program. It works
well even if some drawbacks remains.
Now ,this line :
For example, my best enemy the VAO, is a container object that links buffer data, vertex layout data and GLSL program input data.Without a dedicated software design, this means that when I change the material of an object (a new fragment shader), I need different VAO...
makes me wonder.In my OpenGL programs I use VAO objects and I can switch between different shader programs without doing any change to VAO itself.So ,have I misunderstood the whole idea? Maybe he means we can switch shaders for the same program without re-linking ?
I'm breaking this answer up into multiple parts.
What the purpose of ARB_separate_shader_objects is
The purpose of this functionality is to be able to easily mix-and-match between vertex/fragment/geometry/tessellation shaders.
Currently, you have to link all shader stages into one monolithic program. So I could be using the same vertex shader code with two different fragment shaders. But this results in two different programs.
Each program has its own set of uniforms and other state. Which means that if I want to change some uniform data in the vertex shader, I have to change it in both programs. I have to use glGetUniformLocation on each (since they could have different locations). I then have to set the value on each one individually.
That's a big pain, and it's highly unnecessary. With separate shaders, you don't have to. You have a program that contains just the vertex shader, and two programs that contain the two fragment shaders. Changing vertex shader uniforms doesn't require two glGetUniformLocation calls. Indeed, it's easier to cache the data, since there's only one vertex shader.
Also, it deals with the combinatorial explosion of shader combinations.
Let's say you have a vertex shader that does simple rigid transformations: it takes a model-to-camera matrix and a camera-to-clip matrix. Maybe a matrix for normals too. And you have a fragment shader that will sample from some texture, do some lighting computations based on the normal, and return a color.
Now let's say you add another fragment shader that takes extra lighting and material parameters. It doesn't have any new inputs from the vertex shaders (no new texture coordinates or anything), just new uniforms. Maybe it's for projective lighting, which the vertex shader isn't involved with. Whatever.
Now let's say we add a new vertex shader that does vertex weighted skinning. It provides the same outputs as the old vertex shader, but it has a bunch of uniforms and input weights for skinning.
That gives us 2 vertex shaders and 2 fragment shaders. A total of 4 program combinations.
What happens when we add 2 more compatible fragment shaders? We get 8 combinations. If we have 3 vertex and 10 fragment shaders, we have 30 total program combinations.
With separate shaders, 3 vertex and 10 fragment shaders needs 30 program pipeline objects, but only 13 program objects. That's over 50% fewer program objects than the non-separate case.
Why the quoted text is wrong
Now ,this line [...] makes me wonder.
It should make you wonder; it's wrong in several ways. For example:
the VAO, is a container object that links buffer data, vertex layout data and GLSL program input data.
No, it does not. It ties buffer objects that provide vertex data to the vertex formats for that data. And it specifies which vertex attribute indices that goes to. But how tightly coupled this is to "GLSL program input data" is entirely up to you.
Without a dedicated software design, this means that when I change the material of an object (a new fragment shader), I need different VAO...
Unless this line equates "a dedicated software design" with "reasonable programming practice", this is pure nonsense.
Here's what I mean. You'll see example code online that does things like this when they set up their vertex data:
glBindBuffer(GL_ARRAY_BUFFER, buffer_object);
glEnableVertexAttribArray(glGetAttribLocation(prog, "position"));
glVertexAttribPointer(glGetAttribLocation(prog, "position"), ...);
There is a technical term for this: terrible code. The only reason to do this is if the shader specified by prog is somehow not under your direct control. And if that's the case... how do you know that prog has an attribute named "position" at all?
Reasonable programming practice for shaders is to use conventions. That's how you know prog has an attribute named "position". But if you know that every program is going to have an attribute named "position", why not take it one step further? When it comes time to link a program, do this:
GLuint prog = glCreateProgram();
glAttachShader(prog, ...); //Repeat as needed.
glBindAttribLocation(prog, 0, "position");
After all, you know that this program must have an attribute named "position"; you're going to assume that when you get it's location later. So cut out the middle man and tell OpenGL what location to use.
This way, you don't have to use glGetAttribLocation; just use 0 when you mean "position".
Even if prog doesn't have an attribute named "position", this will still link successfully. OpenGL doesn't mind if you bind attribute locations that don't exist. So you can just apply a series of glBindAttribLocation calls to every program you create, without problems. Indeed, you can have multiple conventions for your attribute names, and as long as you stick to one set or the other, you'll be fine.
Even better, stick it in the shader and don't bother with the glBindAttribLocation solution at all:
#version 330
layout(location = 0) in vec4 position;
In short: always use conventions for your attribute locations. If you see glGetAttribLocation in a program, consider that a code smell. That way, you can use any VAO for any program, since the VAO is simply written against the convention.
I don't see how having a convention equates to "dedicated software design", but hey, I didn't write that line either.
I can switch between different shader programs
Yes, but you have to replace whole programs altogether. Separate shader objects allow you to replace only one stage (e.g. only vertex shader).
If you have for example N vertex shaders and M vertex shaders, using conventional linking you would have N * M program objects (to cover all posible combinations). Using separate shader objects, they are separated from each other, and thus you need to keep only N + M shader objects. That's a significant improvement in complex scenarios.