• Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  

DX11 DirectX 11 Questions

This topic is 2348 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

So Dx11 comes with 2 new buffers, giving a total of 3 buffers

- Constant Buffer
- Read/Write Buffer
- Read/Write Structured Buffer

The last 2 are the new ones, that are similar to Constant buffers, only that they can be written to in the Compute and Pixel shaders. Whats the purpose of the structured buffer though? is the setting up of the structure size purely a convenience factor? Because it would be just as easy to fill a normal buffer with the data, and do your own indexing in the shader.

If you dont want the ability to write, do the last 2 hold any benefit over constant buffers?

Can someone suggest some examples of where you would write to a buffer using a pixel shader?

Ive noticed that the geometry shader is actually after the tessellation stage. I find this odd. When would you ever need to create geometry after the mesh has been tessellated? surely would have made more sense to put it before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
Hi.

There are even more new buffer types, look better. None of them are anything like constant buffers!!! Recall that constant buffers are very limited in size. All the new types are SRV/UAV, which simply means they are accessed by texture sampling units (or what's the proper name) as all the other textures and buffers. The difference is that you can now scatter (not only gather) to some of them. In another thread here, we mention an example of writing to a buffer in a PS and that would be for Bokeh (using AppendBuffer). Structured buffers are just convenience buffers and I'd say pretty neat.

The fact that the geometry stage is after tessellation is pretty logical, too. Tessellation actually doesn't really duplicate or "spawn" geometry, it just "refines" it (there is some topology involved) and a Domain Shader is simply just a kind of Vertex Shader! You cannot duplicate geometry for a cube map rendering using tessellation any easily, for example. That's why GS comes after DS and it doesn't matter where the input to GS comes from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote][color=#1C2837][size=2]There are even more new buffer types, look better.[/size][/color][/quote]

What are the others?


[quote][color=#1C2837][size=2]The fact that the geometry stage is after tessellation is pretty logical, too. Tessellation actually doesn't really duplicate or "spawn" geometry, it just "refines" it (there is some topology involved) and a Domain Shader is simply just a kind of Vertex Shader! You cannot duplicate geometry for a cube map rendering using tessellation any easily, for example. That's why GS comes after DS and it doesn't matter where the input to GS comes from. [/size][/color][/quote]

The reason I find it odd, is that the general workflow for using a geometry shader was to add new geometry on the fly. It seems logical that you would want to add geometry in the geometry shader, and then further refine this with tessellation as necessary. Take for example the case where you wanted to transform points into random 3d shapes,[font="sans-serif"][b] [/b][size="2"]something like Icosahedron's. If the tessellation was after the GShader, then these could be automatically further refined by the tessellation stage (which of course could still be done in the GShader). Im just trying to understand the benefit of having the tessellation before the GShader. [/size][/font]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote]What are the others?[/quote]
-> [url="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff471359%28v=VS.85%29.aspx"]http://msdn.microsof...v=VS.85%29.aspx[/url]

[quote]The reason I find it odd, is that the general workflow for using a geometry shader was to add new geometry on the fly. It seems logical that you would want to add geometry in the geometry shader, and then further refine this with tessellation as necessary. Take for example the case where you wanted to transform points into random 3d shapes,[b] [/b]something like Icosahedron's. If the tessellation was after the GShader, then these could be automatically further refined by the tessellation stage (which of course could still be done in the GShader). Im just trying to understand the benefit of having the tessellation before the GShader. [/quote]

There is huge difference between GS and tessellation purpose. Although GS can be used to do tessellation algorithms, it can do MUCH more and cannot do many things as effectively (and massively) as a tessellator, on the other hand. GS can spawn new geometry of different types. Tessellation just "refines" geometry, that means that it adds new vertices/edges into the existing primitives. But AFAIK, there isn't a way of turning one triangle into two triangles that would [b]not[/b] share their vertices in the topology using SM5 tessellation.

Still, if you want to achieve your workflow, then just first expand your points into icosahedrons (without a tessellation stage!!!) and then [b]feed back[/b] your newly generated geometry to the tessellation stage for refinement/displacement/whatever. And then perhaps continue with yet another GS that'd "duplicate" them for each side of cubemap at once (or not). There will not be a great performance hit, all data will stay on GPU and the host will just issue two draw calls (pixels will be rasterised just once, of course, at the very end).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Constant buffers and the other buffer types are not really the same at all. Constant buffers are intended for small amounts heterogeneous data, regular buffers are intended for large amounts of homogeneous data.

Structured buffers are for when you have a buffer containing a user-defined structure of data that you'd like to look up by index. Without structured buffer implementing this would require lots of tedious and error-prone format conversions, unpacking, and address calculations in the shader.

pcmaster already mentioned that you can use an AppendStructuredBuffer in a pixel shader to push out data from a subset of your pixels, which I used in a sample to implement a bokeh effect using point sprites. Another example is AMD's order independent transparency demo, where instead of writing out pixel colors to a render target they used atomic operations on buffers to implement per-pixel linked lists.

The geometry shader is directly tied to both the stream out and rasterization stages, both of which require fully-formed primitive and not un-tessellated patches. Also most common and well-suited use cases for geometry shaders are generating fins, generating point sprites, and rendering geometry to multiple cube map faces/shadow map cascades in a single draw call. You would never want to do any of those things before tessellation. You also wouldn't want to just expand points to arbitrary geometry...expansion in a geometry shader can be very expensive and you want to minimize the number of output vertices as much as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One further convenience with the StructuredBuffer is that it can be used with the Append/Consume functionality with a whole structure. So if you have a particular data structure that you are using (as a particle state for example) then you can append and consume directly with complete structures instead of trying to manage the individual pieces of data.

In addition to the other points made about the geometry shader, don't forget that it can also reduce data as well as introduce it. After the tessellation is performed, if you want to cull unnecessary primitives before they get rasterized then the geometry shader can make the decision not to pass that primitive along. The GS can also change the topology type, so even if you tessellate triangles, then you can still convert them to lines or points if you want... It is one of the more flexible pipeline stages, and usually can be used for some unconventional and/or creative algorithms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement
  • Advertisement
  • Popular Now

  • Advertisement
  • Similar Content

    • By AxeGuywithanAxe
      I wanted to see how others are currently handling descriptor heap updates and management.
      I've read a few articles and there tends to be three major strategies :
      1 ) You split up descriptor heaps per shader stage ( i.e one for vertex shader , pixel , hull, etc)
      2) You have one descriptor heap for an entire pipeline
      3) You split up descriptor heaps for update each update frequency (i.e EResourceSet_PerInstance , EResourceSet_PerPass , EResourceSet_PerMaterial, etc)
      The benefits of the first two approaches is that it makes it easier to port current code, and descriptor / resource descriptor management and updating tends to be easier to manage, but it seems to be not as efficient.
      The benefits of the third approach seems to be that it's the most efficient because you only manage and update objects when they change.
    • By evelyn4you
      hi,
      until now i use typical vertexshader approach for skinning with a Constantbuffer containing the transform matrix for the bones and an the vertexbuffer containing bone index and bone weight.
      Now i have implemented realtime environment  probe cubemaping so i have to render my scene from many point of views and the time for skinning takes too long because it is recalculated for every side of the cubemap.
      For Info i am working on Win7 an therefore use one Shadermodel 5.0 not 5.x that have more options, or is there a way to use 5.x in Win 7
      My Graphic Card is Directx 12 compatible NVidia GTX 960
      the member turanszkij has posted a good for me understandable compute shader. ( for Info: in his engine he uses an optimized version of it )
      https://turanszkij.wordpress.com/2017/09/09/skinning-in-compute-shader/
      Now my questions
       is it possible to feed the compute shader with my orignial vertexbuffer or do i have to copy it in several ByteAdressBuffers as implemented in the following code ?
        the same question is about the constant buffer of the matrixes
       my more urgent question is how do i feed my normal pipeline with the result of the compute Shader which are 2 RWByteAddressBuffers that contain position an normal
      for example i could use 2 vertexbuffer bindings
      1 containing only the uv coordinates
      2.containing position and normal
      How do i copy from the RWByteAddressBuffers to the vertexbuffer ?
       
      (Code from turanszkij )
      Here is my shader implementation for skinning a mesh in a compute shader:
      1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 struct Bone { float4x4 pose; }; StructuredBuffer<Bone> boneBuffer;   ByteAddressBuffer vertexBuffer_POS; // T-Pose pos ByteAddressBuffer vertexBuffer_NOR; // T-Pose normal ByteAddressBuffer vertexBuffer_WEI; // bone weights ByteAddressBuffer vertexBuffer_BON; // bone indices   RWByteAddressBuffer streamoutBuffer_POS; // skinned pos RWByteAddressBuffer streamoutBuffer_NOR; // skinned normal RWByteAddressBuffer streamoutBuffer_PRE; // previous frame skinned pos   inline void Skinning(inout float4 pos, inout float4 nor, in float4 inBon, in float4 inWei) {  float4 p = 0, pp = 0;  float3 n = 0;  float4x4 m;  float3x3 m3;  float weisum = 0;   // force loop to reduce register pressure  // though this way we can not interleave TEX - ALU operations  [loop]  for (uint i = 0; ((i &lt; 4) &amp;&amp; (weisum&lt;1.0f)); ++i)  {  m = boneBuffer[(uint)inBon].pose;  m3 = (float3x3)m;   p += mul(float4(pos.xyz, 1), m)*inWei;  n += mul(nor.xyz, m3)*inWei;   weisum += inWei;  }   bool w = any(inWei);  pos.xyz = w ? p.xyz : pos.xyz;  nor.xyz = w ? n : nor.xyz; }   [numthreads(1024, 1, 1)] void main( uint3 DTid : SV_DispatchThreadID ) {  const uint fetchAddress = DTid.x * 16; // stride is 16 bytes for each vertex buffer now...   uint4 pos_u = vertexBuffer_POS.Load4(fetchAddress);  uint4 nor_u = vertexBuffer_NOR.Load4(fetchAddress);  uint4 wei_u = vertexBuffer_WEI.Load4(fetchAddress);  uint4 bon_u = vertexBuffer_BON.Load4(fetchAddress);   float4 pos = asfloat(pos_u);  float4 nor = asfloat(nor_u);  float4 wei = asfloat(wei_u);  float4 bon = asfloat(bon_u);   Skinning(pos, nor, bon, wei);   pos_u = asuint(pos);  nor_u = asuint(nor);   // copy prev frame current pos to current frame prev pos streamoutBuffer_PRE.Store4(fetchAddress, streamoutBuffer_POS.Load4(fetchAddress)); // write out skinned props:  streamoutBuffer_POS.Store4(fetchAddress, pos_u);  streamoutBuffer_NOR.Store4(fetchAddress, nor_u); }  
    • By mister345
      Hi, can someone please explain why this is giving an assertion EyePosition!=0 exception?
       
      _lightBufferVS->viewMatrix = DirectX::XMMatrixLookAtLH(XMLoadFloat3(&_lightBufferVS->position), XMLoadFloat3(&_lookAt), XMLoadFloat3(&up));
      It looks like DirectX doesnt want the 2nd parameter to be a zero vector in the assertion, but I passed in a zero vector with this exact same code in another program and it ran just fine. (Here is the version of the code that worked - note XMLoadFloat3(&m_lookAt) parameter value is (0,0,0) at runtime - I debugged it - but it throws no exceptions.
          m_viewMatrix = DirectX::XMMatrixLookAtLH(XMLoadFloat3(&m_position), XMLoadFloat3(&m_lookAt), XMLoadFloat3(&up)); Here is the repo for the broken code (See LightClass) https://github.com/mister51213/DirectX11Engine/blob/master/DirectX11Engine/LightClass.cpp
      and here is the repo with the alternative version of the code that is working with a value of (0,0,0) for the second parameter.
      https://github.com/mister51213/DX11Port_SoftShadows/blob/master/Engine/lightclass.cpp
    • By mister345
      Hi, can somebody please tell me in clear simple steps how to debug and step through an hlsl shader file?
      I already did Debug > Start Graphics Debugging > then captured some frames from Visual Studio and
      double clicked on the frame to open it, but no idea where to go from there.
       
      I've been searching for hours and there's no information on this, not even on the Microsoft Website!
      They say "open the  Graphics Pixel History window" but there is no such window!
      Then they say, in the "Pipeline Stages choose Start Debugging"  but the Start Debugging option is nowhere to be found in the whole interface.
      Also, how do I even open the hlsl file that I want to set a break point in from inside the Graphics Debugger?
       
      All I want to do is set a break point in a specific hlsl file, step thru it, and see the data, but this is so unbelievably complicated
      and Microsoft's instructions are horrible! Somebody please, please help.
       
       
       

    • By mister345
      I finally ported Rastertek's tutorial # 42 on soft shadows and blur shading. This tutorial has a ton of really useful effects and there's no working version anywhere online.
      Unfortunately it just draws a black screen. Not sure what's causing it. I'm guessing the camera or ortho matrix transforms are wrong, light directions, or maybe texture resources not being properly initialized.  I didnt change any of the variables though, only upgraded all types and functions DirectX3DVector3 to XMFLOAT3, and used DirectXTK for texture loading. If anyone is willing to take a look at what might be causing the black screen, maybe something pops out to you, let me know, thanks.
      https://github.com/mister51213/DX11Port_SoftShadows
       
      Also, for reference, here's tutorial #40 which has normal shadows but no blur, which I also ported, and it works perfectly.
      https://github.com/mister51213/DX11Port_ShadowMapping
       
  • Advertisement