From: william.gacquer <wil...@la...> - 2002-02-28 15:45:52
|
> I've been doing some work on a 3D graphics API for this device: > > http://www.neomagic.com/product/7041.asp ho ho! I wanted my company to work with neomagic but never had time to specify the nexgen PDA we wanted to do. Now, our project evolved but I am still interested in embedded 3D accelerators. Do you know if any company will embed such kind of beasts soon in PDAs? Paul, do you also believe that openGL for handheld devices is a dead end ? William "Acc=E9dez au courrier =E9lectronique de La Poste : www.laposte.net ; 3615 LAPOSTENET (0,13 =80/mn) ; t=E9l : 08 92 68 13 50 (0,34=80/mn)" |
From: <rjf...@at...> - 2002-02-28 17:11:37
|
Yeah, FPU thing can be a bit of a drag. All my graphics apps on the PocketPC turned out to be fill bound, never transform bound. On the Cassiopeia at least, a cache line miss is like virtual memory on a PC. The amount of memory was not a real problem (most folks doing real work on them have 64MB or more RAM), but its speed is a killer (e.g. executing out of a CF card). Suffice to say I eventually got about 4-5M voxels/sec with depth buffered shear-warp variants before shelving the project(actually, the weekend came to a close). I now use a CF 802.11b card to do volume rendering on my PocketPC :) ... > Pretty funny, I also work on Volume rendering on PocketPCs! > I am interested in any OpenGL and/or volume rendering stuff related to > Pocket PCs. > The fact about Mesa on PocketPC is not the basic operations of drawing > in a buffer. The problem is that PocketPCs do not have a FPU. They are > really slow at computing floating points. > Did anyone work on fixed point implementation? > > William > > rjf...@at... wrote: > > >Actually, a basic OSMesa port is pretty trivial. > >I did one some time ago as part of the OSMesa work > >in one afternoon. The only part I did not do is > >the "wgl" emulation. So, you could create an > >OSMesa context and point it at the display buffer > >(either the windows bitmap content or the buffer > >exposed by the gaming API, both work). Enough of > >a port to meet my needs. I did not bother supporting > >8bit PDAs. > > > >If anyone is really interested, I could try to track > >down the project again and contribute add it back to > >Mesa, assuming I can find the project again. I used > >it to port some volume rendering applications my > >PocketPC. The memory heirachy on these PDAs can > >seriously impact rendering performance however. > >Staying in the cache is extremely critical on these > >devices... > > > >>Ekkla Research did. But It's not trivial at all. Months of > >>customisation! Thus, we have to charge for the port in order > >>to recover from the work cost. > >>See http://www.ekkla-research.com/ > >> > >>William > >> > >>>I know that this might sound weird and crazy... but has > >>> > >>anybody tried to > >> > >>>compile Mesa for PocketPC/WinCE? > >>> > >>>-- > >>>_____________________________________________________________ > >>>Emmanuel Fre'con > >>> > >>http://www.sics.se/~emmanuel/ > >> > >>> > >>>_______________________________________________ > >>>Mesa3d-users mailing list > >>>Mes...@li... > >>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa3d-users > >>> > >>"Accédez au courrier électronique de La Poste : www.laposte.net ; 3615 > >>LAPOSTENET (0,13 EUR/mn) ; tél : 08 92 68 13 50 (0,34EUR/mn)" > >> > >> > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Mesa3d-users mailing list > >>Mes...@li... > >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa3d-users > >> > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Mesa3d-users mailing list > >Mes...@li... > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa3d-users > > > |
From: william.gacquer <wil...@la...> - 2002-02-28 18:12:36
|
Just a few questions about wgl, glut and/or osmesa on win32 and PocketPCs. Is wgl still supported ? I understand that Mesa people don't need it but I wonder if Microsoft people really want it to exist. Thus, I don't see any reason for supporting it. I don't believe that porting it to the PocketPC is the best thing to do. GLUT is a much nicer approach but relies on the wgl implementation. Freeglut is also incompatible with WinCE simply because WinCE is a subset of Win32. In order to have GLUT working on a buffer provided by osmesa, I must have a GLUT implementation that does not use X or Win32 (GDI, DirectX, DDraw, etc..) calls. I never tried the DOS version of GLUT. How does it work? Is this feasible ? William "Acc=E9dez au courrier =E9lectronique de La Poste : www.laposte.net ; 3615 LAPOSTENET (0,13 =80/mn) ; t=E9l : 08 92 68 13 50 (0,34=80/mn)" |
From: Stephen J B. <sj...@li...> - 2002-02-28 18:29:50
|
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, william.gacquer wrote: > Is wgl still supported ? I understand that Mesa people don't > need it but I wonder if Microsoft people really want it to > exist. Thus, I don't see any reason for supporting it. I don't > believe that porting it to the PocketPC is the best thing to > do. It's hard to see how you could write programs without *some* of the wgl calls being implemented. > GLUT is a much nicer approach but relies on the wgl > implementation. Freeglut is also incompatible with WinCE > simply because WinCE is a subset of Win32. > > In order to have GLUT working on a buffer provided by osmesa, > I must have a GLUT implementation that does not use X or Win32 > (GDI, DirectX, DDraw, etc..) calls. I never tried the DOS > version of GLUT. How does it work? Is this feasible ? Is there a DOS version? GLUT needs to do things like open windows, read joystick/mouse/keyboard and establish OpenGL rendering contexts...I don't see how you'd do that under DOS. I think that whatever you do on the PocketPC, you'd want something *like* the wgl calls - maybe you'd emulate them - maybe you'd emulate the glX calls instead - but something with that functionality pretty much has to exists. What you do depends largely on your expectations of portability of application programs onto your new platform. If you expect portability then you'd better emulate (or at least provide stubs for) all of the wgl or glX calls. If you don't expect portability (which is a perfectly reasonable position to take IMHO), you could just invent some new calls and port freeglut to make use of them. ---- Steve Baker (817)619-2657 (Vox/Vox-Mail) L3Com/Link Simulation & Training (817)619-2466 (Fax) Work: sj...@li... http://www.link.com Home: sjb...@ai... http://www.sjbaker.org |
From: Brian P. <br...@tu...> - 2002-02-28 20:07:52
|
"william.gacquer" wrote: > > Just a few questions about wgl, glut and/or osmesa on win32 > and PocketPCs. > > Is wgl still supported ? Karl Schultz has been maintaining Mesa's Windows/WGL code. > I understand that Mesa people don't > need it but I wonder if Microsoft people really want it to > exist. Thus, I don't see any reason for supporting it. I don't > believe that porting it to the PocketPC is the best thing to > do. > > GLUT is a much nicer approach but relies on the wgl > implementation. Freeglut is also incompatible with WinCE > simply because WinCE is a subset of Win32. > > In order to have GLUT working on a buffer provided by osmesa, > I must have a GLUT implementation that does not use X or Win32 > (GDI, DirectX, DDraw, etc..) calls. I never tried the DOS > version of GLUT. How does it work? Is this feasible ? Mesa 4.0.2 will have an updated DOS driver (and GLUT) which was contributed by Danial Borca. You can get it out of CVS until I release 4.0.2 (in a couple weeks, probably). -Brian |
From: william.gacquer <wil...@la...> - 2002-02-28 18:50:36
|
OK, I had a look at the GLUT for DOS implememtation. It's a fake. Not exactly but most functions are unimplemented. http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi- bin/viewcvs.cgi/allegrogl/alleggl/src/amesa/glut-dj/ Does that mean that GLUT never existed for Voodoo1 ? William "Acc=E9dez au courrier =E9lectronique de La Poste : www.laposte.net ; 3615 LAPOSTENET (0,13 =80/mn) ; t=E9l : 08 92 68 13 50 (0,34=80/mn)" |
From: Stephen J B. <sj...@li...> - 2002-02-28 20:02:38
|
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, william.gacquer wrote: > OK, I had a look at the GLUT for DOS implememtation. It's a > fake. Not exactly but most functions are unimplemented. > > http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi- > bin/viewcvs.cgi/allegrogl/alleggl/src/amesa/glut-dj/ > > Does that mean that GLUT never existed for Voodoo1 ? Well, not exactly. The Voodoo (under both Linux and Windoze) was blissfully unaware of any windowing concepts. It was possible to write GLUT programs - but they would open a window on the underlying 2D graphics card and then Mesa would kick GLIDE into life which would turn on the Voodoo card which would hide the 2D graphics and render full-screen no matter what. So you could (kinda) use GLUT/wgl/glX providing that: * You didn't need more than one window. * You didn't have any kind of GUI (even the GLUT popup menu). * You didn't let the underlying 2D window lose keyboard/mouse focus ('glutWarpPointer' can be your friend! :-) It was kludgy - just barely workable for games - hopeless for applications that needed GUI support. Mesa has (had?) a hack to leave the 2D card turned on (so you can't see the Voodoo's output) and then on every swapbuffers, it sucks out the contents of the 3D frame buffer and writes it into the 2D window. That hack made GLUT programs work perfectly on Voodoo-1/2 - but kept your frame rate down to about 10Hz because of the pixel copy overhead. ---- Steve Baker (817)619-2657 (Vox/Vox-Mail) L3Com/Link Simulation & Training (817)619-2466 (Fax) Work: sj...@li... http://www.link.com Home: sjb...@ai... http://www.sjbaker.org |
From: Karl S. <ksc...@rs...> - 2002-02-28 20:47:19
|
> -----Original Message----- > From: william.gacquer [mailto:wil...@la...] > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 11:12 AM > To: mes...@li... > Subject: Re: [Mesa3d-users] PocketPC support >=20 >=20 > Just a few questions about wgl, glut and/or osmesa on win32=20 > and PocketPCs. >=20 > Is wgl still supported ? I understand that Mesa people don't=20 > need it but I wonder if Microsoft people really want it to=20 > exist. Thus, I don't see any reason for supporting it. I don't=20 > believe that porting it to the PocketPC is the best thing to=20 > do. Wgl is still there and working in Mesa 4. It is there to support wgl = apps and GLUT. A few people have asked about this support and how it relates to = Microsoft. To be honest, I didn't really tackle any of those issues and just made = what had been in Mesa work for Mesa 4. I'm not sure what you'd use in wgl's place, other than osmesa and then copying to the window. (This is what my app does.) > GLUT is a much nicer approach but relies on the wgl=20 > implementation. Freeglut is also incompatible with WinCE=20 > simply because WinCE is a subset of Win32. >=20 > In order to have GLUT working on a buffer provided by osmesa,=20 > I must have a GLUT implementation that does not use X or Win32=20 > (GDI, DirectX, DDraw, etc..) calls. I never tried the DOS=20 > version of GLUT. How does it work? Is this feasible ?=20 I suppose one could hack GLUT to do this. I haven't looked at this possibility, so I really do not know. As mentioned elsewhere, the DOS = GLUT might be a better place to start. Karl >=20 > William > =20 >=20 > "Acc=E9dez au courrier =E9lectronique de La Poste :=20 > www.laposte.net ; 3615 LAPOSTENET (0,13 EUR/mn) ; t=E9l : 08 92=20 > 68 13 50 (0,34EUR/mn)" >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Mesa3d-users mailing list > Mes...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa3d-users >=20 |
From: Brian P. <br...@tu...> - 2002-02-28 16:39:29
|
"william.gacquer" wrote: > > > I've been doing some work on a 3D graphics API for this > device: > > > > http://www.neomagic.com/product/7041.asp > > ho ho! I wanted my company to work with neomagic but never had > time to specify the nexgen PDA we wanted to do. Now, our > project evolved but I am still interested in embedded 3D > accelerators. > > Do you know if any company will embed such kind of beasts soon > in PDAs? > > Paul, do you also believe that openGL for handheld devices is > a dead end ? No. It's just that today's hardware limitations (mainly the lack of FP and limited memory) make it difficult. For now, subset libraries using fixed point arithmetic are probably more practical. Before long, handheld hardware should be quite capable of supporting a complete OpenGL library. -Brian |
From: Stephen J B. <sj...@li...> - 2002-02-28 17:17:33
|
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Brian Paul wrote: > > Paul, do you also believe that openGL for handheld devices is > > a dead end ? > > No. It's just that today's hardware limitations (mainly the lack > of FP and limited memory) make it difficult. I'm not even sure that memory is a problem. The NeoMagic device has 4Mb of fast on-chip RAM - which could be expanded by whoever builds the PDA with external RAM chips. Also, the Linux implementation allows you to 'mmap' files in the ROM-disk into your main memory - so application code (and data that doesn't change) can stay in the ROM cartridge. So if this is a ROM-cart game machine, memory might not be such a problem. These contraptions typically have very low resolution LCD displays - so you don't need much of that valuable RAM for the frame buffers and your textures tend to be quite small (by modern standards). > For now, subset > libraries using fixed point arithmetic are probably more practical. > Before long, handheld hardware should be quite capable of supporting > a complete OpenGL library. Yep. ---- Steve Baker (817)619-2657 (Vox/Vox-Mail) L3Com/Link Simulation & Training (817)619-2466 (Fax) Work: sj...@li... http://www.link.com Home: sjb...@ai... http://www.sjbaker.org |
From: Brian P. <br...@tu...> - 2002-02-28 17:27:45
|
Stephen J Baker wrote: > > On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Brian Paul wrote: > > > > Paul, do you also believe that openGL for handheld devices is > > > a dead end ? > > > > No. It's just that today's hardware limitations (mainly the lack > > of FP and limited memory) make it difficult. > > I'm not even sure that memory is a problem. The NeoMagic device > has 4Mb of fast on-chip RAM - which could be expanded by whoever builds > the PDA with external RAM chips. Also, the Linux implementation allows > you to 'mmap' files in the ROM-disk into your main memory - so application > code (and data that doesn't change) can stay in the ROM cartridge. So > if this is a ROM-cart game machine, memory might not be such a problem. > > These contraptions typically have very low resolution LCD displays - so > you don't need much of that valuable RAM for the frame buffers and > your textures tend to be quite small (by modern standards). Good points. I guess my thoughts are biased toward the PalmOS. My Sony N760 only has 8MB RAM and I last time I looked at PalmOS development you had to deal with 32KB memory segments (ick). -Brian |
From: Stephen J B. <sj...@li...> - 2002-02-28 17:09:43
|
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, william.gacquer wrote: > Do you know if any company will embed such kind of beasts soon > in PDAs? Presumably - although it's not clear where the boundary between a handheld game console and a PDA lies. It might be that we see these devices appearing in things that look more like a GameBoy (but with full 3D and Linux) before we see them in PDA's. However, the difference between those might only be in the shape of the case, the presence of a joystick and the way it's marketted. > Paul, do you also believe that openGL for handheld devices is > a dead end ? Actually, I don't think it's a dead end - it's only dead so long as the CPU's have no hardware floating point. That's something that's bound to appear in the future - it's just a matter of what you can do on the available silicon area and without consuming too much battery life *this* year. ---- Steve Baker (817)619-2657 (Vox/Vox-Mail) L3Com/Link Simulation & Training (817)619-2466 (Fax) Work: sj...@li... http://www.link.com Home: sjb...@ai... http://www.sjbaker.org |