Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Accelerated env baking on the GPU #1165

Merged
merged 29 commits into from
Jan 23, 2024
Merged

Accelerated env baking on the GPU #1165

merged 29 commits into from
Jan 23, 2024

Conversation

riccardobl
Copy link
Member

@riccardobl riccardobl commented Sep 1, 2019

This PR improves the performances and user friendliness of environment baking.

Accelerated Baking

This PR adds 3 accelerated bakers that can be used in place of the current CPU baker.
The enhancements brought by these bakers is very remarkable, as they allow the environment baking process to be completed in <1s, effectively rendering the need for prebaked environments obsolete.

IBLGLEnvBaker

This is the most high-performing baker. It run entirely on the GPU, and can generate prefiltered, irradiance, and BRDF maps.
This is the classic env baker implementation that is currently not used in jme.

IBLHybridEnvBakerLight and IBLGLEnvBakerLight

These bakers generate the prefiltered map and spherical harmonics currently used in the latest PBR shader in jme.
Although this method reduces the VRAM consumption, this approach doesn't allow for as much optimization as the IBLGLEnvBaker. Nonetheless, the following accelerated baking methods are available:

  • IBLHybridEnvBakerLight: A hybrid baker that creates the prefiltered environmental map using GPU while performing spheric harmonics calculations on the CPU.
  • IBLGLEnvBakerLight: Similar to the IBLHybridEnvBakerLight, but it leverages the GPU to handle spheric harmonics generation as well.

New APIs

The LightProbeFactory has now been deprecated in favor of the LightProbeFactory2, which seamlessly integrates the accelerated baking methods. This transition serves as a dedicated migration path for legacy code.

The new API EnvironmentProbeControl is designed to streamline and simplify the entire baking and rebaking process.
Here's how it works:

  • Integration: Developers are only required to instantiate an EnvironmentProbeControl and attach it to the root node of their targeted scene (e.g., the rootNode).

  • Geometry Tagging: By employing the EnvironmentProbeControl.tag(Spatial) method, you can mark which geometries are part of the environment and should be baked (e.g., the skybox).

  • Profit: Once the tagging is in place, the control takes care of the rest. On the next frame, it automatically initiates baking for the tagged geometries within its node and completes it before the scene is rendered. No more waiting for the processes to conclude or resorting to convoluted culling tricks.

  • Update the baking: Every time the baking needs to be updated (eg. day-night cycles) the rebake() method of the control can be invoked.

This new system operates directly within the same scene. It uses RenderManager.setRenderFilter() (added by this PR) to filter out non tagged geometries, avoiding cloning, extra viewports, or other convoluted approaces.

Example

This is a fully functional remake of TestPBRLighting using the new API

package jme3test.light.pbr;


import com.jme3.app.SimpleApplication;
import com.jme3.environment.EnvironmentProbeControl;
import com.jme3.input.ChaseCamera;
import com.jme3.material.Material;
import com.jme3.math.FastMath;
import com.jme3.scene.Geometry;
import com.jme3.scene.Spatial;
import com.jme3.util.SkyFactory;
import com.jme3.util.mikktspace.MikktspaceTangentGenerator;

/**
 * TestPBRSimple
 */
public class TestPBRSimple extends SimpleApplication {

    public static void main(String[] args) {
        new TestPBRSimple().start();
    }

    @Override
    public void simpleInitApp() {

        Geometry model = (Geometry) assetManager.loadModel("Models/Tank/tank.j3o");
        MikktspaceTangentGenerator.generate(model);

        Material pbrMat = assetManager.loadMaterial("Models/Tank/tank.j3m");
        model.setMaterial(pbrMat);
        rootNode.attachChild(model);

        ChaseCamera chaseCam = new ChaseCamera(cam, model, inputManager);
        chaseCam.setDragToRotate(true);
        chaseCam.setMinVerticalRotation(-FastMath.HALF_PI);
        chaseCam.setMaxDistance(1000);
        chaseCam.setSmoothMotion(true);
        chaseCam.setRotationSensitivity(10);
        chaseCam.setZoomSensitivity(5);
        flyCam.setEnabled(false);

        Spatial sky = SkyFactory.createSky(assetManager, "Textures/Sky/Path.hdr", SkyFactory.EnvMapType.EquirectMap);
        rootNode.attachChild(sky);

        // Create baker control
        EnvironmentProbeControl envProbe = new EnvironmentProbeControl( assetManager, 256);
        rootNode.addControl(envProbe);

        // Tag the sky, only the tagged spatials will be rendered in the env map
        EnvironmentProbeControl.tag(sky);

    }

}

As you can see, much simpler and cleaner.

Knowing issues

The difference in roughness levels in the prefiltered envmap generated by the accelerated baker is less prominent than the current one, i am not sure why, you can test it out by toggling USE_ACCELERATED_BAKING in the TestPBRLighting class included in this PR.
I am not sure if this is an issue or which one is the correct behavior.

Minimum requirements

OpenGL 3.1 or GL ES 3.0

@tlf30
Copy link
Contributor

tlf30 commented Oct 29, 2019

@riccardobl this looks really cool. Is there more info on this?

@riccardobl
Copy link
Member Author

You can see it working in
TestPBRLighting.java
and
TestPBRSimple.java

The code is based on this https://learnopengl.com/PBR/IBL/Specular-IBL (and following articles).

The PR works but as you can see in the two examples, it exposes two different apis, one that is similar to what is used now in the master branch (LightProbeFactory2) and one that use a control. I'm not sure which one should go in the final pr. Also it requires modifications to the framebuffer class, that i will have to extract to a dedicated PR.

@riccardobl
Copy link
Member Author

I've updated the PR and added a description. This is ready to be reviewed

@riccardobl riccardobl marked this pull request as ready for review August 8, 2023 16:09
@riccardobl
Copy link
Member Author

Thank you for your review @danielperano

@riccardobl
Copy link
Member Author

Rebased to current master

@riccardobl
Copy link
Member Author

Are there any objections to merging this? It's worth noting that this PR doesn't break the current baking process.
@jMonkeyEngine/core

@capdevon
Copy link
Contributor

capdevon commented Nov 7, 2023

I would suggest adding to the EnvironmentProbeControl.java class also the enabled variable and all the functionality of the AbstractControl class lost with the implementation of the Control class.

  • getSpatial()
  • setEnabled()
  • isEnabled()
  • write/read spatial and enabled fields.
  • execution of the update() and render() methods only if the Controller is enabled.
public abstract class AbstractControl implements Control, JmeCloneable {
...
}

Edit: done, thanks @riccardobl

*
* @param assetManager
*/
public void setAssetManager(AssetManager assetManager) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The setAssetManager() method is not necessary, since it is a mandatory parameter of the public constructor

public EnvironmentProbeControl(AssetManager assetManager, int size) {}

I would suggest removing it.

Copy link
Member Author

@riccardobl riccardobl Nov 10, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

i can be used to change the asset manager used internally by the control that might not be the same used to deserialize it in some circumstances i supppose

Copy link
Contributor

@capdevon capdevon Nov 10, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Okay, but if you are not sure about this feature, you could change the visibility of the AssetManager variable from private to protected by letting the developers decide whether to add a set method or not. You also benefited from this trick by extending the LigthProbe class. More freedom and less code to maintain ;)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

protected fields are evil. They become part of the public API and provide no recourse for changing.
Always always always better to provide protected methods because at least then you can change implementations, provide backwards compatibility, etc.. With protected fields you are stuck forever.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

JME technically supports multiple instances of AssetManager, so setAssetManager was there to allow to change the internal asset manager after the control is deserialized, but on second thought, maybe it only adds confusion.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@riccardobl Ok, I suggest removing it.

}

/**
* Create a new environment probe control.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The Javadoc summary fragment should not be a complete sentence.
I suggest "Create" -> "Creates"

}

/**
* Tag spatial as part of the environment for this EnvironmentProbeControl.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The Javadoc summary fragment should not be a complete sentence.
I suggest "Tag" -> "Tags the specified"

}

/**
* Untag spatial as part of the environment for this
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The Javadoc summary fragment should not be a complete sentence.
I suggest "Untag" -> "Untags the specified"

}

/**
* Tag spatial as part of the environment for every EnvironmentProbeControl.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The Javadoc summary fragment should not be a complete sentence.
I suggest "Tag" -> "Tags the specified"

@riccardobl
Copy link
Member Author

riccardobl commented Nov 10, 2023

Apologies, but going through all the Javadoc to insert 's' and '.' seems a bit like nitpicking at this stage. If you check any file in the JME repo, you'll notice that these 'rules' were never enforced before.
I hope you can still appreciate this PR, since it introduces an important feature.
@stephengold

@tonihele
Copy link
Contributor

Apologies, but going through all the Javadoc to insert 's' and '.' seems a bit like nitpicking at this stage. If you check any file in the JME repo, you'll notice that these 'rules' were never enforced before. I hope you can still appreciate this PR, since it introduces an important feature. @stephengold

I kinda agree that with Javadoc, good enough is good enough. Enforcing strict rules on Javadoc doesn't serve much purpose to me at least. If it is understandable English and gives good enough information, that would be good enough. Good enough, did I mention this term? Difficult to measure, subjective, maybe you understand what I mean.

And thanks @riccardobl for the feature and taking all the feedback maturely!

Copy link
Contributor

@capdevon capdevon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for your patience @riccardobl . I am curious to try this new feature! Just a couple of finishing touches and I think it's good enough for me ;)

tx.getImage().clearUpdateNeeded();
}

protected int limitMips(int nbMipMaps, int baseW, int baseH, RenderManager rm) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There are unused parameters in this method (int baseW, int baseH, RenderManager rm). I would suggest to remove them ;)

*
* @param assetManager
*/
public void setAssetManager(AssetManager assetManager) {
Copy link
Contributor

@capdevon capdevon Nov 10, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Okay, but if you are not sure about this feature, you could change the visibility of the AssetManager variable from private to protected by letting the developers decide whether to add a set method or not. You also benefited from this trick by extending the LigthProbe class. More freedom and less code to maintain ;)

* the asset manager
* @return a debug node
*/
public static Node getDebugGui(AssetManager manager, LightProbe probe) {
Copy link
Contributor

@capdevon capdevon Nov 10, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The default settings of this method may not satisfy users who want to decide the name to assign to the debug node or its initial position in their tests. Since this is not typically a core, but a debugging feature, I would suggest moving this method to a test class (eg. TestPBRSimple or TestPBRLighting). That way you have more freedom to explain to users how to debug the data properly without raising exceptions ;) I too reading this method can't figure out when is the right time to test whether the LightProbe is ready or not ;)
Solution: test class with example.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This was copied from LightProbeFactory, so while i agree with you, the purpose of this class is to migrate the code using LightProbeFactory to the new baker, so it should expose the same api

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@riccardobl Ok, I don't particularly like it, but I can accept it.

* A control that automatically handles environment bake and rebake including
* only tagged spatials.
*
* Simple usage example: <code>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't have a strong opinion on this, but I would suggest using this long explanation in a useful way by removing it from here and putting it in a test class. That way you simplify your life and don't have to worry about updating the javadoc in case of future changes or fixes ;)

@stephengold
Copy link
Member

Apologies, but going through all the Javadoc to insert 's' and '.' seems a bit like nitpicking at this stage. If you check any file in the JME repo, you'll notice that these 'rules' were never enforced before. I hope you can still appreciate this PR, since it introduces an important feature. @stephengold

@riccardobl I agree it's nitpicking, and I do appreciate the importance of your work.

Are you implying you don't want me to review yourPRs? If so, just say so. In this instance, however, you specifically requested my review, so I felt obligated to do my best, poor though it is.

Prior to PR #1655 (November 2021) this project had no official coding style. With nothing to enforce, there was of course no enforcement. Since then, I've tried to follow and enforce our preferred style, at least on new Java files. This involves plenty of nitpicking. I'm sure I sometimes make mistakes.

If you don't like the "rules", you're in a good position to change them.

@riccardobl
Copy link
Member Author

Are you implying you don't want me to review yourPRs?

Not at all. I appreciate your dedication to the project, and I value your input. However, I'd like to suggest that we focus more on the content during the reviews, rather than getting caught up in minor styling issues or comments. I think this adjustment also helps prevent contributors from feeling discouraged due to the strict rules.

@scenemax3d
Copy link
Contributor

Apologies, but going through all the Javadoc to insert 's' and '.' seems a bit like nitpicking at this stage. If you check any file in the JME repo, you'll notice that these 'rules' were never enforced before. I hope you can still appreciate this PR, since it introduces an important feature. @stephengold

@riccardobl I agree it's nitpicking, and I do appreciate the importance of your work.

Are you implying you don't want me to review yourPRs? If so, just say so. In this instance, however, you specifically requested my review, so I felt obligated to do my best, poor though it is.

Prior to PR #1655 (November 2021) this project had no official coding style. With nothing to enforce, there was of course no enforcement. Since then, I've tried to follow and enforce our preferred style, at least on new Java files. This involves plenty of nitpicking. I'm sure I sometimes make mistakes.

If you don't like the "rules", you're in a good position to change them.

@stephengold ,
Thanks for posting the detailed JavaDocs comments. I fixed all of them (I hope). Can you please re-review?
10X

@stephengold
Copy link
Member

I'm not interested in re-reviewing this PR.

@stephengold stephengold removed their request for review January 23, 2024 18:12
@scenemax3d
Copy link
Contributor

I'm not interested in re-reviewing this PR.

You submitted changes request, therefore I asked

@scenemax3d scenemax3d merged commit e452b16 into master Jan 23, 2024
14 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants