My mesh shaders talk at XDC 2022

Posted on . Updated on .

Filed under: igalia

In my previous post I talked about the VK_EXT_mesh_shader extension that had just been released for Vulkan, and in which I had participated by reviewing the spec and writing CTS tests. Back then I referred readers to external documentation sources like the Vulkan mesh shading post on the Khronos Blog, but today I can add one more interesting resource. A couple of weeks ago I went to Minneapolis to participate in XDC 2022, where I gave an introductory talk about mesh shaders that’s now available on YouTube. In the talk I give some details about the concepts, the Vulkan API and how the new shading stages work.

Just after me, Timur Kristóf also presented an excellent talk with details about the Mesa mesh shader implementation for RADV, available as part of the same playlist.

As an additional resource, I’m going to participate together with Timur, Steven Winston and Christoph Kubisch in a Khronos Vulkanised Webinar to talk a bit more about mesh shaders on October 27. You must register to attend, but attendance is free.

Back to XDC, crossing the Atlantic Ocean to participate in the event was definitely tiring, but I had a lot of fun at the conference. It was my first in-person XDC and a special one too, this year hosted together with WineConf and FOSS XR. Seeing everyone there and shaking some hands, even with our masks on most of the time, made me realize how much I missed traveling to events. Special thanks to Codeweavers for organizing the conference, and in particular to Jeremy White and specially to Arek Hiler for taking care of most technical details and acting as a host and manager in the XDC room.

Apart from my mesh shaders talk, do not miss other talks by Igalians at the conference:

And, of course, take a look at the whole event playlist for more super-interesting content, like the one by Alyssa Rosenzweig and Lina Asahi about reverse-engineered GPU drivers, the one about Zink by Mike Blumenkrantz (thanks for the many shout-outs!) or the guide to write Vulkan drivers by Jason Ekstrand which includes some info about the new open source Vulkan driver for NVIDIA cards.

That said, if you’re really interested in my talk but don’t want to watch a video (or the closed captions are giving you trouble), you can find the slides and the script to my talk below. Each thumbnail can be clicked to view a full-HD image.

Talk slides and script

Title slide: Replacing the geometry pipeline with mesh shaders

Hi everyone, I’m Ricardo Garcia from Igalia. Most of my work revolves around CTS tests and the Vulkan specification, and today I’ll be talking about the new mesh shader extension for Vulkan that was published a month ago. I participated in the release process of this extension by writing thousands of tests and reviewing and discussing the specification text for Vulkan, GLSL and SPIR-V.

Mesh shaders are a new way of processing geometry in the graphics pipeline. Essentially, they introduce an alternative way of creating graphics pipelines in Vulkan, but they don’t introduce a completely new type of pipeline.

The new extension is multi-vendor and heavily based on the NVIDIA-only extension that existed before, but some details have been fine-tuned to make it closer to the DX12 version of mesh shaders and to make it easier to implement for other vendors.

Main Points

I want to cover what mesh shaders are, how they compare to the classic pipelines and how they solve some problems.

Then we’ll take a look at what a mesh shader looks like and how it works, and we’ll also talk about drawbacks mesh shaders have.

What is mesh shading?

Mesh shading introduces a new type of graphics pipeline with a much smaller number of stages compared to the classic one. One of the new stages is called the mesh shading stage.

These new pipelines try to address some issues and shortcomings with classic pipelines on modern GPUs. The new pipeline stages have many things in common with compute shaders, as we’ll see.

Classic Graphics Pipeline

This is a simplified version of the classic pipeline.

Basically the pipeline can be divided in two parts. The first stages are in charge of generating primitives for the rasterizer.

Then the rasterizer does a lot of magic including primitive clipping, barycentric interpolation and preparing fragment data for fragment shader invocations.

It’s technically possible to replace the whole pipeline with a compute shader (there’s a talk on Thursday about this), but mesh shaders do not touch the rasterizer and everything that comes after it.

Mesh shaders try to apply a compute model to replace some of this with a shader that’s similar to compute, but the changes are restricted to the first part of the pipeline.

Mesh Shading Pipeline

If I have to cut the presentation short, this is perhaps one of the slides you should focus on.

Mesh shading employs a shader that’s similar to compute to generate geometry for the rasterizer.

There’s no input assembly, no vertex shader, no tessellation, etc. Everything that you did with those stages is now done in the new mesh shading stage, which is a bit more flexible and powerful.

Mesh Shading Pipeline (Full)

In reality, the mesh shading extension actually introduces two new stages. There’s an optional task shader that runs before the mesh shader, but we’ll forget about it for now.

Classic Pipeline Problems

These are the problems mesh shading tries to solve.

Vertex inputs are a bit annoying to implement in drivers and in some hardware they use specific fixed function units that may be a bottleneck in some cases, at least in theory.

The main pain point is that vertex shaders work at the per-vertex level, so you don’t generally have control of how geometry is arranged in primitives. You may run several vertex shader invocations that end up forming a primitive that faces back and is not visible and there’s no easy way to filter those out, so you waste computing power and memory bandwidth reading data for those vertices. Some implementations do some clever stuff here trying to avoid these issues.

Finally, tessellation and geometry shaders should perhaps be simpler and more powerful, and should work like compute shaders so we process vertices in parallel more efficiently.

How do they look? GLSL Extension

So far we know mesh shaders look a bit like compute shaders and they need to generate geometry somehow because their output goes to the rasterizer, so lets take a look.

The example will be in GLSL to make it easier to read. As you can see, it needs a new extension which, when translated to SPIR-V will be converted into a SPIR-V extension that gives access to some new opcodes and functionality.

How do they look? Local Size

The first similarity to compute is that mesh shaders are dispatched in 3d work groups like compute shaders, and each of them has a number of invocations in 3d controlled by the shader itself. Same deal. There’s a limit to the size of each work group, but the minimum mandatory limit by the spec is 128 invocations. If the hardware does not support work groups of that size, they will be emulated. We also have a properties structure in Vulkan where you can check the recommended maximum size for work groups according to the driver.

Inside the body of your shader you get access to the typical built-ins for compute shaders, like the number of work groups, work group id, local invocation indices, etc.

If subgroups are supported, you can also use subgroup operations in them.

How do they look? Type of output geometry

But mesh shaders also have to generate geometry. The type can not be chosen at runtime. When writing the shader you have to decide if you shader will output triangles, lines or points.

How do they look? Maximum vertices and primitives

You must also indicate an upper limit in the number of vertices and primitives that each work group will generate.

Generally speaking, this will be a small-ish number. Several implementations will limit you to 256 vertices and primitives at most, which is the minimum required limit.

To handle big meshes with this, you’ll need several work groups and each work group will handle a piece of the whole mesh.

In each work group, the local invocations will cooperate to generate arrays of vertex and primitive data.

How do they look? Output geometry arrays

And here you can see how. After, perhaps, some initial processing not seen here, you have to indicate how many actual vertices and primitives the work group will emit, using the SetMeshOutputsEXT call.

That call goes first before filling any output array and you can reason about it as letting the implementation allocate the appropriate amount of memory for those output arrays.

Mesh shaders output indexed geometry, like when you use vertex and index buffers together.

You need to write data for each vertex to an output array, and primitive indices to another output array. Typically, each local invocation handles one position or a chunk of those arrays so they cooperate together to fill the whole thing. In the slide here you see a couple of those arrays, the most typical ones.

The built-in mesh vertices ext array contains per-vertex built-ins, like the vertex position. Indices used with this array go from 0 to ACTUAL_V-1

Then, the primitive triangle indices ext array contains, for each triangle, 3 uint indices into the previous vertices array. The primitive indices array itself is accessed using indices from 0 to ACTUAL_P-1. If there’s a second slide that I want you to remember, it’s this one. What we have here is an initial template to start writing any mesh shader.

How do they look? Output attributes

There are a few more details we can add. For example, mesh shaders can also generate custom output attributes that will be interpolated and used as inputs to the fragment shader, just like vertex shaders can.

The difference is that in mesh shaders they form arrays. If we say nothing, like in the first output here, they’re considered per-vertex and have the same index range as the mesh vertices array.

A nice addition for mesh shaders is that you can use the perprimitiveEXT keyword to indicate output attributes are per-primitive and do not need to be interpolated, like the second output here. If you use these, you need to declare them with the same keyword in the fragment shader so the interfaces match. Indices to these arrays have the same range as the built-in primitive indices array.

And, of course, if there’s no input assembly we need to read data from somewhere. Typically from descriptors like storage buffers containing vertex and maybe index information, but we could also generate geometry procedurally.

Some built-in arrays

Just to show you a few more details, these are the built-in arrays used for geometry. There are arrays of indices for triangles, lines or points depending on what the shader is supposed to generate.

The mesh vertices ext array that we saw before can contain a bit more data apart from the position (point size, clip and cull distances).

The third array was not used before. It’s the first time I mention it and as you can see it’s per-primitive instead of per-vertex. You can indicate a few things like the primitive id, the layer or viewport index, etc.


As I mentioned before, each work group can only emit a relatively small number of primitives and vertices, so for big models, several work groups are dispatched and each of them is in charge of generating and processing a meshlet, which are the colored patches you see here on the bunny.

It’s worth mentioning the subdivision of big meshes into meshlets is typically done when preparing assets for the application, meaning there shouldn’t be any runtime delay.

Dispatching Work Groups

Mesh shading work groups are dispatched with specific commands inside a render pass, and they look similar to compute dispatches as you can see here, with a 3d size.

Mesh Shading Pipeline (Full)

Let’s talk a bit about task shaders, which are optional. If present, they go before mesh shaders, and the dispatch commands do not control the number of mesh shader work groups, but the number of task shader work groups that are dispatched and each task shader work group will dispatch a number of mesh shader work groups.

Task (Amplification) Shader

Each task shader work group also follows the compute model, with a number of local invocations that cooperate together.

Each work group typically pre-processes geometry in some way and amplifies or reduces the amount of work that needs to be done. That’s why it’s called the amplification shader in DX12.

Once that pre-processing is done, each task work group decides, at runtime, how many mesh work groups to launch as children, forming a tree with two levels.

Task (Amplification) Shader: Example Dispatch

One interesting detail about this is that compute built-ins in mesh shaders may not be unique when using task shaders. They are only unique per branch. In this example, we dispatched a couple of task shader work groups and each of them decided to dispatch 2 and 3 mesh shader work groups. Some mesh shader work groups will have the same work group id and, if the second task shader work group had launched 2 children instead of 3, even the number of work groups would be the same.

But we probably want them all to process different things, so the way to tell them apart from inside the mesh shader code is to use a payload: a piece of data that is generated in each task work group and passed down to its children as read-only data.

Combining the payload with existing built-ins allows you to process different things in each mesh shader work group.


This is done like this. On the left you have a task shader.

You can see it also works like a compute shader and invocations cooperate to pre-process stuff and generate the payload. The payload is a variable declared with the task payload shared ext qualifier. These payloads work like shared memory. That’s why they have “shared” in the qualifier.

In the mesh shader they are read-only. You can declare the same payload and read from it.

Mesh Shading Pros


Avoiding input assembly bottlenecks if they exist.

Pre-compute data and discard geometry in advance, saving processing power and memory bandwidth.

Geometry and tessellation can be applied freely, in more flexible ways.

The use of a model similar to compute shaders allows us to take advantage of the GPU processing power more effectively.

Many games use a compute pre-pass to process some data and calculate things that will be needed at draw time. With mesh shaders it may be possible to streamline this and integrate this processing into the mesh or task shaders.

You can also abuse mesh shading pipelines as compute pipelines with two levels if needed.

Mesh Shading Cons


Mesh shading is problematic for tiling GPUs as you can imagine, for the same reasons tessellation and geometry shaders suck on those platforms.

Giving users freedom in this part of the pipeline may allow them to shoot themselves in the foot and end-up with sub-optimal performance. If not used properly, mesh shaders may be slower than classic pipelines.

The structure of vertex and index buffers needs to be declared explicitly in shaders, increasing coupling between CPU and GPU code, which is not nice.

Most importantly, right now it’s hard or even impossible to write a single mesh shader that performs great on all implementations.

Some vendor preferences are exposed as properties by the extension.

NVIDIA loves smaller work groups and using loops in code to generate geometry with each invocation (several vertices and triangles per invocation).

Threads on AMD can only generate at most one vertex and one primitive, so they’d love you to use bigger work groups and use the local invocation index to access per-vertex and per-primitive arrays.

As you can imagine, this probably results in different mesh shaders for each vendor.

Questions and Answers

In the Q&A section, someone asked about differences between the Vulkan version of mesh shaders and the Metal version of them. Unfortunately, I’m not familiar with Metal so I said I didn’t know. Then, I was asked if it was possible to implement the classic pipeline on top of mesh shaders, and I replied it was theoretically possible. The programming model of mesh shaders is more flexible, so the classic pipeline can be implemented on top of it. However, I didn’t reply (because I have doubts) about how efficient that could be. Finally, the last question asked me to elaborate on stuff that could be done with task shaders, and I replied that apart from integrating compute pre-processing in the pipeline, they were also typically used to select LOD levels or discard meshlets and, hence, to avoid launching mesh work groups to deal with them.

Closing Slide

VK_EXT_mesh_shader finally released

Posted on .

Filed under: igalia

Vulkan 1.3.226 was released yesterday and it finally includes the cross-vendor VK_EXT_mesh_shader extension. This has definitely been an important moment for me. As part of my job at Igalia and our collaboration with Valve, I had the chance to work reviewing this extension in depth and writing thousands of CTS tests for it. You’ll notice I’m listed as one of the extension contributors. Hopefully, the new tests will be released to the public soon as part of the open source VK-GL-CTS Khronos project.

During this multi-month journey I had the chance to work closely with several vendors working on adding support for this extension in multiple drivers, including NVIDIA (special shout-out to Christoph Kubisch, Patrick Mours, Pankaj Mistry and Piers Daniell among others), Intel (thanks Marcin Ślusarz for finding and reporting many test bugs) and, of course, Valve. Working for the latter, Timur Kristóf provided an implementation for RADV and reported to me dozens of bugs, test ideas, suggestions and improvements. Do not miss his blog post series about mesh shaders and how they’re implemented on RDNA2 hardware. Timur’s implementation will be used in your Linux system if you have a capable AMD GPU and, of course, the Steam Deck.

The extension has been developed with DX12 compatibility in mind. It’s possible to use mesh shading from Vulkan natively and it also allows future titles using DX12 mesh shading to be properly run on top of VKD3D-Proton and enjoyed on Linux, if possible, from day one. It’s hard to provide a summary of the added functionality and what mesh shaders are about in a short blog post like this one, so I’ll refer you to external documentation sources, starting by the Vulkan mesh shading post on the Khronos Blog. Both Timur and myself have submitted a couple of talks to XDC 2022 which have been accepted and will give you a primer on mesh shading as well as some more information on the RADV implementation. Do not miss the event at Minneapolis or enjoy it remotely while it’s being livestreamed in October.

My FOSDEM 2022 talk: Fun with border colors in Vulkan

Posted on . Updated on .

Filed under: igalia

FOSDEM 2022 took place this past weekend, on February 5th and 6th. It was a virtual event for the second year in a row, but this year the Graphics devroom made a comeback and I participated in it with a talk titled “Fun with border colors in Vulkan”. In the talk, I explained the context and origins behind the VK_EXT_border_color_swizzle extension that was published last year and in which I’m listed as one of the contributors.

Big kudos and a big thank you to the FOSDEM organizers one more year. FOSDEM is arguably the most important free and open source software conference in Europe and one of the most important FOSS conferences in the world. It’s run entirely by volunteers, doing an incredible amount of work that makes it possible to have hundreds of talks and dozens of different devrooms in the span of two days. Special thanks to the Graphics devroom organizers.

For the virtual setup, one more year FOSDEM relied on Matrix. It’s great because at Igalia we also use Matrix for our internal communications and, thanks to the federated nature of the service, I could join the FOSDEM virtual rooms using the same interface, client and account I normally use for work. The FOSDEM organizers also let participants create ad-hoc accounts to join the conference, in case they didn’t have a Matrix account previously. Thanks to Matrix widgets, each virtual devroom had its corresponding video stream, which you could also watch freely on their site, embedded in each of the virtual devrooms, so participants wanting to watch the talks and ask questions had everything in a single page.

Talks were pre-recorded and submitted in advance, played at the scheduled times, and Jitsi was used for post-talk Q&A sessions, in which moderators and devroom organizers read aloud the most voted questions in the devroom chat.

Of course, a conference this big is not without its glitches. Video feeds from presenters and moderators were sometimes cut automatically by Jitsi allegedly due to insufficient bandwidth. It also happened to me during my Q&A section while I was using a wired connection on a 300 Mbps symmetric FTTH line. I can only suppose the pipe was not wide enough on the other end to handle dozens of streams at the same time, or Jitsi was playing games as it sometimes does. In any case, audio was flawless.

In addition, some of the pre-recorded videos could not be played at the scheduled time, resulting in a black screen with no sound, due to an apparent bug in the video system. It’s worth noting all pre-recorded talks had been submitted, processed and reviewed prior to the conference, so this was an unexpected problem. This happened with my talk and I had to do the presentation live. Fortunately, I had written a script for the talk and could use it to deliver it without issues by sharing my screen with the slides over Jitsi.

Finally, as a possible improvement point for future virtual or mixed editions, is the fact that the deadline for submitting talk videos was only communicated directly and prominently by email on the day the deadline ended, a couple of weeks before the conference. It was also mentioned in the presenter’s guide that was linked in a previous email message, but an explicit warning a few days or a week before the deadline would have been useful to avoid last-minute rushes and delays submitting talks.

In any case, those small problems don’t take away the great online-only experience we had this year.


Another advantage of having a written script for the talk is that I can use it to provide a pseudo-transcription of its contents for those that prefer not to watch a video or are unable to do so. I’ve also summed up the Q&A section at the end below. The slides are available as an attachment in the talk page.

Enjoy and see you next year, hopefully in Brussels this time.

Slide 1 (Talk cover)

Hello, my name is Ricardo Garcia. I work at Igalia as part of its Graphics Team, where I mostly work on the CTS project creating new Vulkan tests and fixing existing ones. Sometimes this means I also contribute to the specification text and other pieces of the Vulkan ecosystem.

Today I’m going to talk about the story behind the “border color swizzle” extension that was published last year. I created tests for this one and I also participated in its release process, so I’m listed as one of the contributors.

Slide 2 (Sampling in Vulkan)

I’ve already started mentioning border colors, so before we dive directly into the extension let me give you a brief introduction to sampling operations in Vulkan and explain where border colors fit in that.

Sampling means reading pixels from an image view and is typically done in the fragment shader, for example to apply a texture to some geometry.

In the example you see here, we have an image view with 3 8-bit color components in BGR order and in unsigned normalized format. This means we’ll suppose each image pixel is stored in memory using 3 bytes, with each byte corresponding to the blue, green and red components in that order.

However, when we read pixels from that image view, we want to get back normalized floating point values between 0 (for the lowest value) and 1 (for the highest value, i.e. when all bits are 1 and the natural number in memory is 255).

As you can see in the GLSL code, the result of the operation is a vector of 4 floating point numbers. Since the image does not have alpha information, it’s natural to think the output vector may have a 1 in the last component, making the color opaque.

If the coordinates of the sample operation make us read the pixel represented there, we would get the values you see on the right.

It’s also worth noting the sampler argument is a combination of two objects in Vulkan: an image view and a sampler object that specifies how sampling is done.

Slide 3 (Normalized Coordinates)

Focusing a bit on the coordinates used to sample from the image, the most common case is using normalized coordinates, which means using floating point values between 0 and 1 in each of the image axis, like the 2D case you see on the right.

But, what happens if the coordinates fall outside that range? That means sampling outside the original image, in points around it like the red marks you see on the right.

That depends on how the sampler is configured. When creating it, we can specify a so-called “address mode” independently for each of the 3 texture coordinate axis that may be used (2 in our example).

Slide 4 (Address Mode)

There are several possible address modes. The most common one is probably the one you see here on the bottom left, which is the repeat addressing mode, which applies some kind of module operation to the coordinates as if the texture was virtually repeating in the selected axis.

There’s also the clamp mode on the top right, for example, which clamps coordinates to 0 and 1 and produces the effect of the texture borders extending beyond the image edge.

The case we’re interested in is the one on the top left, which is the border mode. When sampling outside we get a border color, as if the image was surrounded by a virtually infinite frame of a chosen color.

Slide 5 (Border Color)

The border color is specified when creating the sampler, and initially could only be chosen among a restricted set of values: transparent black (all zeros), opaque white (all ones) or the “special” opaque black color, which has a zero in all color components and a 1 in the alpha component.

The “custom border color” extension introduced the possibility of specifying arbitrary RGBA colors when creating the sampler.

Slide 6 (Image View Swizzle)

However, sampling operations are also affected by one parameter that’s not part of the sampler object. It’s part of the image view and it’s called the component swizzle.

In the example I gave you before we got some color values back, but that was supposing the component swizzle was the identity swizzle (i.e. color components were not reorder or replaced).

It’s possible, however, to specify other swizzles indicating what the resulting final color should be for each of the 4 components: you can reorder the components arbitrarily (e.g. saying the red component should actually come from the original blue one), you can force some of them to be zero or one, you can replicate one of the original components in multiple positions of the final color, etc. It’s a very flexible operation.

Slide 7 (Border Color and Swizzle pt. 1)

While working on the Zink Mesa driver, Mike discovered that the interaction between non-identity swizzle and custom border colors produced different results for different implementations, and wondered if the result was specified at all.

Slide 8 (Border Color and Swizzle pt. 2)

Let me give you an example: you specify a custom border color of 0, 0, 1, 1 (opaque blue) and an addressing mode of clamping to border in the sampler.

The image view has this strange swizzle in which the red component should come from the original blue, the green component is always zero, the blue component comes from the original green and the alpha component is not modified.

If the swizzle applies to the border color you get red. If it does not, you get blue.

Any option is reasonable: if the border color is specified as part of the sampler, maybe you want to get that color no matter which image view you use that sampler on, and expect to always get a blue border.

If the border color is supposed to act as if it came from the original image, it should be affected by the swizzle as the normal pixels are and you’d get red.

Slide 9 (Border Color and Swizzle pt. 3)

Jason pointed out the spec laid out the rules in a section called “Texel Input Operations”, which specifies that swizzling should affect border colors, and non-identity swizzles could be applied to custom border colors without restrictions according to the spec, contrary to “opaque black”, which was considered a special value and non-identity swizzles would result in undefined values with that border.

Slide 10 (Texel Input Operations)

The Texel Input Operations spec section describes what the expected result is according to some steps which are supposed to happen in a defined order. It doesn’t mean the hardware has to work like this. It may need instructions before or after the hardware sampling operation to simulate things happen in the order described there.

I’ve simplified and removed some of the steps but if border color needs to be applied we’re interested in the steps we can see in bold, and step 5 (border color applied) comes before step 7 (applying the image view swizzle).

I’ll describe the steps with a bit more detail now.

Slide 11 (Coordinate Conversion)

Step 1 is coordinate conversion: this includes converting normalized coordinates to integer texel coordinates for the image view and clamping and modifying those values depending on the addressing mode.

Slide 12 (Coordinate Validation)

Once that is done, step 2 is validating the coordinates. Here, we’ll decide if texel replacement takes place or not, which may imply using the border color. In other sampling modes, robustness features will also be taken into account.

Slide 13 (Reading Texel from Image)

Step 3 happens when the coordinates are valid, and is reading the actual texel from the image. This immediately implies reordering components from the in-memory layout to the standard RGBA layout, which means a BGR image view gets its components immediately put in RGB order after reading.

Slide 14 (Format Conversion)

Step 4 also applies if an actual texel was read from the image and is format conversion. For example, unsigned normalized formats need to convert pixel values (stored as natural numbers in memory) to floating point values.

Our example texel, already in RGB order, results in the values you see on the right.

Slide 15 (Texel Replacement)

Step 5 is texel replacement, and is the alternative to the previous two steps when the coordinates were not valid. In the case of border colors, this means taking the border color and cutting it short so it only has the components present in the original image view, to act as if the border color was actually part of the image.

Because this happens after the color components have already been reordered, the border color is always specified in standard red, green, blue and alpha order when creating the sampler. The fact that the original image view was in BGR order is irrelevant for the border color. We care about the alpha component being missing, but not about the in-memory order of the image view.

Our transparent blue border is converted to just “blue” in this step.

Slide 16 (Expansion to RGBA)

Step 6 takes us back to a unified flow of steps: it applies to the color no matter where it came from. The color is expanded to always have 4 components as expected in the shader. Missing color components are replaced with zeros and the alpha component, if missing, is set to one.

Our original transparent blue border is now opaque blue.

Slide 17 (Component Swizzle)

Step 7, finally the swizzle is applied. Let’s suppose our image view had that strange swizzle in which the red component is copied from the original blue, the green component is set to zero, the blue one is set to one and the alpha component is not modified.

Our original transparent blue border is now opaque magenta.

Slide 18 (VK_EXT_custom_border_color)

So we had this situation in which some implementations swizzled the border color and others did not. What could we do?

We could double-down on the existing spec and ask vendors to fix their implementations but, what happens if they cannot fix them? Or if the fix is impractical due to its impact in performance?

Unfortunately, that was the actual situation: some implementations could not be fixed. After discovering this problem, CTS tests were going to be created for these cases. If an implementation failed to behave as mandated by the spec, it wouldn’t pass conformance, so those implementations only had one way out: stop supporting custom border colors, but that’s also a loss for users if those implementations are in widespread use (and they were).

The second option is backpedaling a bit, making behavior undefined unless some other feature is present and designing a mechanism that would allow custom border colors to be used with non-identity swizzles at least in some of the implementations.

Slide 19 (VK_EXT_border_color_swizzle)

And that’s how the “border color swizzle” extension was created last year. Custom colors with non-identity swizzle produced undefined results unless the borderColorSwizzle feature was available and enabled. Some implementations could advertise support for this almost “for free” and others could advertise lack of support for this feature.

In the middle ground, some implementations can indicate they support the case, but the component swizzle has to be indicated when creating the sampler as well. So it’s both part of the image view and part of the sampler. Samplers created this way can only be used with image views having a matching component swizzle (which means they are no longer generic samplers).

The drawback of this extension, apart from the obvious observation that it should’ve been part of the original custom border color extension, is that it somehow lowers the bar for applications that want to use a single code path for every vendor. If borderColorSwizzle is supported, it’s always legal to pass the swizzle when creating the sampler. Some implementations will need it and the rest can ignore it, so the unified code path is now harder or more specific.

And that’s basically it. Sometimes the Vulkan Working Group in Khronos has had to backpedal and mark as undefined something that previous versions of the Vulkan spec considered defined. It’s not frequent nor ideal, but it happens. But it usually does not go as far as publishing a new extension as part of the fix, which is why I considered this interesting.

Slide 20 (Questions?)

Thanks for watching! Let me know if you have any questions.

Q&A Section

Martin: The first question is from "ancurio" and he’s asking if swizzling is implemented in hardware.

Me: I don’t work on implementations so take my answer with a grain of salt. It’s my understanding you can usually program that in hardware and the hardware does the swizzling for you. There may be implementations which need to do the swizzling in software, emitting extra instructions.

Martin: Another question from "ancurio". When you said lowering the bar do you mean raising it?

I explain that, yes, I meant to say raising the bar for the application. Note: I meant to say that it lowers the bar for the specification and API, which means a more complicated solution has been accepted.

Martin: "enunes" asks if this was originally motivated by some real application bug or by something like conformance tests/spec disambiguation?

I explain it has both factors. Mike found the problem while developing Zink, so a real application hit the problematic case, and then the Vulkan Working Group inside Khronos wanted to fix this, make the spec clear and provide a solution for apps that wanted to use non-identity swizzle with border colors, as it was originally allowed.

Martin: no more questions in the room but I have one more for you. How was your experience dealing with Khronos coordinating with different vendors and figuring out what was the acceptable solution for everyone?

I explain that the main driver behind the extension in Khronos was Piers Daniell from NVIDIA (NB: listed as the extension author). I mention that my experience was positive, that the Working Group is composed of people who are really interested in making a good specification and implementations that serve app developers. When this problem was detected I created some tests that worked as a poll to see which vendors could make this work easily and what others may need to make this work if at all. Then, this was discussed in the Working Group, a solution was proposed (the extension), then more vendors reviewed and commented that, then tests were adapted to the final solution, and finally the extension was published.

Martin: How long did this whole process take?

Me: A few months. Take into account the Working Group does not meet every day, and they have a backlog of issues to discuss. Each of the previous steps takes several weeks, so you end up with a few months, which is not bad.

Martin: Not bad at all.

Me: Not at all, I think it works reasonably well.

Martin: Specially when you realize you broke something and the specification needs fixing. Definitely decent.

Debugging shaders in Vulkan using printf

Posted on .

Filed under: igalia

Debugging programs using printf statements is not a technique that everybody appreciates. However, it can be quite useful and sometimes necessary depending on the situation. My past work on air traffic control software involved using several forms of printf debugging many times. The distributed and time-sensitive nature of the system being studied made it inconvenient or simply impossible to reproduce some issues and situations if one of the processes was stalled while it was being debugged.

In the context of Vulkan and graphics in general, printf debugging can be useful to see what shader programs are doing, but some people may not be aware it’s possible to “print” values from shaders. In Vulkan, shader programs are normally created in a high level language like GLSL or HLSL and then compiled to SPIR-V, which is then passed down to the driver and compiled to the GPU’s native instruction set. That final binary, many times outside the control of user applications, runs in a quite closed and highly parallel environment without many options to observe what’s happening and without text input and output facilities. Fortunately, tools like glslang can generate some debug information when compiling shaders to SPIR-V and other tools like Nsight can use that information to let you debug shaders being run.

Still, being able to print the values of different expressions inside a shader can be an easy way to debug issues. With the arrival of Ray Tracing, this is even more useful than before. In ray tracing pipelines, the shaders being executed and resources being used are chosen based on the scene geometry, the origin and the direction of the ray being traced. printf debugging can let you see where you are and what you’re using. So how do you print values from shaders?

Vulkan’s debug printf is implemented as part of the Validation Layers and the general procedure is well documented. If you were to implement this kind of mechanism yourself, you’d likely use a storage buffer to save the different values you want to print while shader invocations are running and, later, you’d go over the contents of that buffer and print the associated message with each value or values. And that is, essentially, what debug printf does but in a very convenient and automated way so that you don’t have to deal with the gory details and corner cases.

In a GLSL shader, simply:

  1. Enable the GL_EXT_debug_printf extension.

  2. Sprinkle your code with debugPrintfEXT() calls.

  3. Use the Vulkan Configurator that’s part of the SDK or manually edit vk_layer_settings.txt for your app enabling VK_VALIDATION_FEATURE_ENABLE_DEBUG_PRINTF_EXT.

  4. Normally, disable other validation features so as not to get too much output.

  5. Take a look at the debug report or debug utils info messages containing printf results, or set printf_to_stdout to true so printf messages are sent to stdout directly.

You can find an example shader in the validation layers test code. The debug printf feature has helped me a lot in the past, so I wanted to make sure it’s widely known and used.

Due to the observer effect, you may end up in situations where your code works correctly when enabling debug printf but incorrectly without it. This may be due to multiple reasons but one of the main ones I’ve encountered is improper synchronization. When debug printf is used, the layers use additional synchronization primitives to sync the contents of auxiliary buffers, which can mask synchronization bugs present in the app.

Finally, RenderDoc 1.14, released at the end of May, also supports Vulkan’s shader printf statements and will let you take a look at the print statements produced during a draw call. Furthermore, the print statements don’t have to be present in the original shader. You can also use the shader edit system to insert them on the fly and use them to debug the results of a particular shader invocation. Isn’t that awesome? Great work by Baldur Karlsson as always.

PS: As a happy coincidence, just yesterday LunarG published a white paper on Vulkan’s debug printf with additional information on this excellent feature. Be sure to check it out!

Linking deqp-vk much faster thanks to lld

Posted on .

Filed under: igalia

Some days ago my Igalia colleague Adrián Pérez pointed us to mold, a new drop-in replacement for existing Unix linkers created by the original author of LLVM lld. While mold is pretty new and does not aim to be 100% compatible with GNU ld, GNU gold or LLVM lld (at least as of the time I’m writing this), I noticed the benchmark table in its README file also painted a pretty picture about the performance of lld, if inferior to that of mold.

In my job at Igalia I work most of the time on VK-GL-CTS, Vulkan and OpenGL’s Conformance Test Suite, which contains thousands of tests for OpenGL and Vulkan. These tests are provided by different executable files and the Vulkan tests on which I’m focused are contained in a binary called deqp-vk. When built with debug information, deqp-vk can be quite large. A recent build, for example, is taking 369 MB in my drive. But the worst part is that linking the binary typically takes around 25 seconds on my work laptop.

$ time --target deqp-vk
  [6/6] Linking CXX executable external/vulkancts/modules/vulkan/deqp-vk

  real    0m25.137s
  user    0m22.280s
  sys     0m3.440s

I had never paid much attention to the linker before, always relying on the default choice in Fedora or any other distribution. However, I decided to install lld, which has an official package, and gave it a try. You Will Not Believe What Happened Next.

$ time --target deqp-vk
  [6/6] Linking CXX executable external/vulkancts/modules/vulkan/deqp-vk

  real    0m2.622s
  user    0m5.456s
  sys     0m1.764s

lld is capable of correctly linking deqp-vk in 1/10th of the time the default linker (GNU ld) takes to do the same job. If you want to try lld yourself you have several options. Ideally, you’d be able to run update-alternatives --set ld /usr/bin/lld as root but that option is notably not available in Fedora. There was a proposal to make that work but it never materialized, so it cannot be made the default system-wide linker.

However, depending on the build system used by a particular project, there should be a way to make it use lld instead of /usr/bin/ld. For example, VK-GL-CTS uses CMake, which invokes the compiler to link executable files, instead of calling the linker directly, which would be unusual. Both GCC and Clang can be passed -fuse-ld=lld as a command line option to use lld instead of the default linker. That flag should be added to CMake’s CMAKE_EXE_LINKER_FLAGS variable, either by reconfiguring an existing project with, for example, ccmake, or by adding the flag to the LDFLAGS environment variable before running CMake on a build directory for the first time.

Looking forward to start using the mold linker in the future and its multithreading capabilities. In the mean time, I’m very happy to have checked lld. It’s not that usual that a simple tooling change as this one gives me such a clear advantage.