Sign in to follow this  

OpenGL OpenGL and unified address space

Recommended Posts

Supposedly new and upcoming hardware supports a feature refereed to as "unified address space" whereby the GPU and CPU can share the same address space, which should allow you to transfer data back and forth with nothing but a memory pointer.

I haven't managed to find much practical information on this. How exactly can this be used? Are there OpenGL extensions for this?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Chris_F' timestamp='1348602202' post='4983697']
Supposedly new and upcoming hardware supports a feature refereed to as "unified address space" whereby the GPU and CPU can share the same address space, which should allow you to transfer data back and forth with nothing but a memory pointer.[/quote]
As an aside, integrated GPUs have done this for years.

It's especially easy in the integrated case, because the GPU is actually using a portion of main memory as its video memory. This has the odd effect of sometimes making CPU->GPU data transfer much cheaper for integrated GPUs than for faster, dedicated GPUs.

[quote name='Chris_F' timestamp='1348602202' post='4983697']
I haven't managed to find much practical information on this. How exactly can this be used? Are there OpenGL extensions for this?[/quote]
No, and I doubt that there will be, in the near future. Unified address space is much more the domain of OpenCL and CUDA computations - I would expect to see support for unified addressing in both of those. Edited by swiftcoder

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='swiftcoder' timestamp='1348607470' post='4983747']
As an aside, integrated GPUs have done this for years.

In fact they haven't; CPUs and GPUs, even integrated ones, use their own address spaces to access the physical memory. What 0x00F4567380 refers to as far as the CPU is concerned is different to what the GPU sees.

AMD's Trinity APUs are, afaik, the first CPU+GPU combo where both parts can access the same memory without requiring a driver to do address translation in any form but it won't be until 2013 that they will be using the same memory controller.

As for the second part of the question; AMD do have some extensions which allow you to 'pin' memory so that it can't be swapped out (GPUs currently can't handle paging in/out of memory so any pages shared must be resident) and thus freely accessed by both CPU and GPU parts - however this is really only useful in the context of an APU otherwise the GPU would be accessing via the PCIe bus which would be a tad on the slow side.

Now, once both the CPU and GPU share the MMU and can respond to page faults accordingly such pinning won't be required, but that's not due until the 2013 time frame from AMD.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='phantom' timestamp='1348610824' post='4983767']
In fact they haven't; CPUs and GPUs, even integrated ones, use their own address spaces to access the physical memory. What 0x00F4567380 refers to as far as the CPU is concerned is different to what the GPU sees.[/quote]
That isn't what I meant. Yes, the address space is different, but don't they still have the ability to transfer control of hardware pages back-and-forth?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Until recently I'm 99.999999% sure that isn't the case; on system start up a chunk of memory was reserved for the integrated GPUs and that was all they could see.

If you wanted to copy something to GPU controlled memory then it was copied across from 'system' ram to 'graphics' ram.

That's why AMD's pinning extensions is a pretty big deal as it allows for that zero-copy stuff to work but the GPU doesn't 'own' it, the memory is just locked so it can't be paged out from the physical address; the GPU itself is still just seeing a physical address, all be it one outside of its normal address range.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Most games consoles use a unified address space from system RAM / GPU RAM ([i]regardless of whether these are physically the same, or separate chips[/i]), which sounds pretty cool, but isn't that much of a game changer.
Some random observations:

* Loading of assets is more straightforward. Typically to load a texture, I read it from disk into some malloc'ed memory, then create a GPU texture resource, then copy my malloc'ed memory into the texture resource ([i]map/unmap/update/etc[/i]), then free my temporary memory.
On consoles, I can "malloc" some "GPU RAM" directly, and then stream the texture from disk straight into it.

* CPU read-back is still not a good idea, unless CPU/GPU RAM are physically unified as well. Dereferencing a pointer to GPU RAM may be very slow. In my experiences on systems where GPU/CPU RAM are physically seperate, despite being unified in address space, the CPU can [i]write[/i] to GPU RAM very quickly, but [i]reads[/i] from it ~10 times slower.

* Even if you do want to have to CPU/GPU communicate via shared memory, it's not straightforward. The GPU buffers commands, and is often an entire frame behind the CPU ([i]on PC, it can be even worse, with some drivers buffering up to half a dozen frames of commands at high frame-rates![/i]).
So, say for example that the GPU is producing some data for us, and the CPU wants to consume that data once it's complete -- then as well as having a (unified address space) pointer to the data to read, you also need to use GPU fence/[url=""]event[/url] system, so you can be notified once the GPU has completed that workload.
Or the converse of the above, where the CPU is producing data for the GPU to consume -- if that's some mutable resource, like changing a single pixel in a texture, then you need to insert GPU fences/events so you can tell when the GPU has finished using the previous version of that texture, then perform your modifications after the GPU has passed that fence/completed that event.

To expand on that last one -- on consoles you can work at a level where you've got a lot of synchronisation between the two processors to get the most out of your extremely limited resources ([i]keep in mind the PS3 has a [/i][i]256MiB [/i][i]GeForce7 and the 360 isn't much better!![/i]).
e.g. we've got 3 objects with procedural textures, but only enough ram for 2 at a time:
You can send off a whole stream of GPU commands in one go, which tells it to draw the 3 objects, but with some important notify/wait points
[font=courier new,courier,monospace]DrawA using Tex0, Notify DrawA complete, DrawB using Tex1, Infinite Loop C, DrawC using Tex0[/font]

You can then prime the CPU so that upon receiving "[i]Notify DrawA complete[/i]", it will immediately execute the function that writes out the appropriate texture data for DrawC into [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Tex0[/font] ([i]which is safe because DrawA is no longer using [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Tex0[/font][/i]).
Meanwhile the GPU continues on with DrawB, and if it completes it before the CPU has done this job, then it goes into an infinite loop ([i]lots of careful hand scheduling work will be done to try and ensure this doesn't happen for efficiency's sake[/i]).
When the CPU finishes writing out the new data to [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Tex0[/font], it overwrites "[font=courier new,courier,monospace]Infinite Loop C[/font]" with "[font=courier new,courier,monospace]goto next[/font]" -- if the GPU hasn't yet reached this command, then when it gets up to it, it will do nothing and move on to the next command ([i]to Draw C using the new [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Tex0[/font][/i]), or, if the GPU has reached the infinite loop, then this will break it out of it so that it can continue to Draw C.

I wouldn't dare try to implement something with such fine-grained CPU/GPU synchronisation via D3D/GL!!

So as you can see, unified address space, plus great event/notification between the two processors, plus explicit knowledge of how CPU->GPU latency and command buffering is implemented, allows you to make the most of both processors... however, this is advanced stuff that's really only done out of desperation on consoles to get by with old hardware. Ideally the above example would be scheduled in such a way that the CPU update job is quicker than the GPU's [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Draw B[/font] job ([i]so that the busy loop isn't executed at all by the GPU[/i]), but if your users can upgrade their GPU, then this busy-wait will occur for some users, and they'll get bottlenecked by their CPUs instead. Edited by Hodgman

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Announcements

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
    • Total Posts
  • Similar Content

    • By test opty
      Hi all,
      I'm starting OpenGL using a tut on the Web. But at this point I would like to know the primitives needed for creating a window using OpenGL. So on Windows and using MS VS 2017, what is the simplest code required to render a window with the title of "First Rectangle", please?
    • By DejayHextrix
      Hi, New here. 
      I need some help. My fiance and I like to play this mobile game online that goes by real time. Her and I are always working but when we have free time we like to play this game. We don't always got time throughout the day to Queue Buildings, troops, Upgrades....etc.... 
      I was told to look into DLL Injection and OpenGL/DirectX Hooking. Is this true? Is this what I need to learn? 
      How do I read the Android files, or modify the files, or get the in-game tags/variables for the game I want? 
      Any assistance on this would be most appreciated. I been everywhere and seems no one knows or is to lazy to help me out. It would be nice to have assistance for once. I don't know what I need to learn. 
      So links of topics I need to learn within the comment section would be SOOOOO.....Helpful. Anything to just get me started. 
      Dejay Hextrix 
    • By mellinoe
      Hi all,
      First time poster here, although I've been reading posts here for quite a while. This place has been invaluable for learning graphics programming -- thanks for a great resource!
      Right now, I'm working on a graphics abstraction layer for .NET which supports D3D11, Vulkan, and OpenGL at the moment. I have implemented most of my planned features already, and things are working well. Some remaining features that I am planning are Compute Shaders, and some flavor of read-write shader resources. At the moment, my shaders can just get simple read-only access to a uniform (or constant) buffer, a texture, or a sampler. Unfortunately, I'm having a tough time grasping the distinctions between all of the different kinds of read-write resources that are available. In D3D alone, there seem to be 5 or 6 different kinds of resources with similar but different characteristics. On top of that, I get the impression that some of them are more or less "obsoleted" by the newer kinds, and don't have much of a place in modern code. There seem to be a few pivots:
      The data source/destination (buffer or texture) Read-write or read-only Structured or unstructured (?) Ordered vs unordered (?) These are just my observations based on a lot of MSDN and OpenGL doc reading. For my library, I'm not interested in exposing every possibility to the user -- just trying to find a good "middle-ground" that can be represented cleanly across API's which is good enough for common scenarios.
      Can anyone give a sort of "overview" of the different options, and perhaps compare/contrast the concepts between Direct3D, OpenGL, and Vulkan? I'd also be very interested in hearing how other folks have abstracted these concepts in their libraries.
    • By aejt
      I recently started getting into graphics programming (2nd try, first try was many years ago) and I'm working on a 3d rendering engine which I hope to be able to make a 3D game with sooner or later. I have plenty of C++ experience, but not a lot when it comes to graphics, and while it's definitely going much better this time, I'm having trouble figuring out how assets are usually handled by engines.
      I'm not having trouble with handling the GPU resources, but more so with how the resources should be defined and used in the system (materials, models, etc).
      This is my plan now, I've implemented most of it except for the XML parts and factories and those are the ones I'm not sure of at all:
      I have these classes:
      For GPU resources:
      Geometry: holds and manages everything needed to render a geometry: VAO, VBO, EBO. Texture: holds and manages a texture which is loaded into the GPU. Shader: holds and manages a shader which is loaded into the GPU. For assets relying on GPU resources:
      Material: holds a shader resource, multiple texture resources, as well as uniform settings. Mesh: holds a geometry and a material. Model: holds multiple meshes, possibly in a tree structure to more easily support skinning later on? For handling GPU resources:
      ResourceCache<T>: T can be any resource loaded into the GPU. It owns these resources and only hands out handles to them on request (currently string identifiers are used when requesting handles, but all resources are stored in a vector and each handle only contains resource's index in that vector) Resource<T>: The handles given out from ResourceCache. The handles are reference counted and to get the underlying resource you simply deference like with pointers (*handle).  
      And my plan is to define everything into these XML documents to abstract away files:
      Resources.xml for ref-counted GPU resources (geometry, shaders, textures) Resources are assigned names/ids and resource files, and possibly some attributes (what vertex attributes does this geometry have? what vertex attributes does this shader expect? what uniforms does this shader use? and so on) Are reference counted using ResourceCache<T> Assets.xml for assets using the GPU resources (materials, meshes, models) Assets are not reference counted, but they hold handles to ref-counted resources. References the resources defined in Resources.xml by names/ids. The XMLs are loaded into some structure in memory which is then used for loading the resources/assets using factory classes:
      Factory classes for resources:
      For example, a texture factory could contain the texture definitions from the XML containing data about textures in the game, as well as a cache containing all loaded textures. This means it has mappings from each name/id to a file and when asked to load a texture with a name/id, it can look up its path and use a "BinaryLoader" to either load the file and create the resource directly, or asynchronously load the file's data into a queue which then can be read from later to create the resources synchronously in the GL context. These factories only return handles.
      Factory classes for assets:
      Much like for resources, these classes contain the definitions for the assets they can load. For example, with the definition the MaterialFactory will know which shader, textures and possibly uniform a certain material has, and with the help of TextureFactory and ShaderFactory, it can retrieve handles to the resources it needs (Shader + Textures), setup itself from XML data (uniform values), and return a created instance of requested material. These factories return actual instances, not handles (but the instances contain handles).
      Is this a good or commonly used approach? Is this going to bite me in the ass later on? Are there other more preferable approaches? Is this outside of the scope of a 3d renderer and should be on the engine side? I'd love to receive and kind of advice or suggestions!
    • By nedondev
      I 'm learning how to create game by using opengl with c/c++ coding, so here is my fist game. In video description also have game contain in Dropbox. May be I will make it better in future.
  • Popular Now