20,741
edits
FlightGear and OpenGL Core Profile: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
FlightGear and OpenGL Core Profile (view source)
Revision as of 14:04, 7 February 2022
, 7 February 2022→Canvas.Path (OpenVG): https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=71&t=39535&hilit=path+osg+canvas&start=30#p390529
m (→Canvas.Path (OpenVG): https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=71&t=39535&hilit=path+osg+canvas&start=30#p390529) |
|||
| Line 279: | Line 279: | ||
As part of the Core profile migration, we need to replace ShivaVG (which is the functional guts of Path.cxx) with a shader based implementation, ideally NanoVG, although Scott has indicated this might not be as easy as originally hoped. <ref>https://sourceforge.net/p/flightgear/mailman/message/37605458/</ref> | As part of the Core profile migration, we need to replace ShivaVG (which is the functional guts of Path.cxx) with a shader based implementation, ideally NanoVG, although Scott has indicated this might not be as easy as originally hoped. <ref>https://sourceforge.net/p/flightgear/mailman/message/37605458/</ref> | ||
Furthermore, there are segfaults/race conditions that are reportedly related to Canvas Path: Based on what we've seen and discussed so far, I still think that it's primarily Canvas.Path (specifically ShivaVG) that we need to look at - aggressive OSG threading is ... aggressive. | |||
Which is to say, the Canvas.Path element is not even using native OSG code, and the flickering shown in the screen shots, suggests that it's something related to Canvas.Path handling. | |||
So far however everything points at canvas, and looking at canvas code, it seems that there's a lot of stuff going on in update and | So far however everything points at canvas, and looking at canvas code, it seems that there's a lot of stuff going on in update and | ||