# Objective
- Add an `ExtractResourcePlugin` for convenience and consistency
## Solution
- Add an `ExtractResourcePlugin` similar to `ExtractComponentPlugin` but for ECS `Resource`s. The system that is executed simply clones the main world resource into a render world resource, if and only if the main world resource was either added or changed since the last execution of the system.
- Add an `ExtractResource` trait with a `fn extract_resource(res: &Self) -> Self` function. This is used by the `ExtractResourcePlugin` to extract the resource
- Add a derive macro for `ExtractResource` on a `Resource` with the `Clone` trait, that simply returns `res.clone()`
- Use `ExtractResourcePlugin` wherever both possible and appropriate
# Objective
- While optimising many_cubes, I noticed that all material handles are extracted regardless of whether the entity to which the handle belongs is visible or not. As such >100k handles are extracted when only <20k are visible.
## Solution
- Only extract material handles of visible entities.
- This improves `many_cubes -- sphere` from ~42fps to ~48fps. It reduces not only the extraction time but also system commands time. `Handle<StandardMaterial>` extraction and its system commands went from 0.522ms + 3.710ms respectively, to 0.267ms + 0.227ms an 88% reduction for this system for this case. It's very view dependent but...
# Objective
Reduce the catch-all grab-bag of functionality in bevy_core by moving FloatOrd to bevy_utils.
A step in addressing #2931 and splitting bevy_core into more specific locations.
## Solution
Move FloatOrd into bevy_utils. Fix the compile errors.
As a result, bevy_core_pipeline, bevy_pbr, bevy_sprite, bevy_text, and bevy_ui no longer depend on bevy_core (they were only using it for `FloatOrd` previously).
# Objective
- Make use of storage buffers, where they are available, for clustered forward bindings to support far more point lights in a scene
- Fixes#3605
- Based on top of #4079
This branch on an M1 Max can keep 60fps with about 2150 point lights of radius 1m in the Sponza scene where I've been testing. The bottleneck is mostly assigning lights to clusters which grows faster than linearly (I think 1000 lights was about 1.5ms and 5000 was 7.5ms). I have seen papers and presentations leveraging compute shaders that can get this up to over 1 million. That said, I think any further optimisations should probably be done in a separate PR.
## Solution
- Add `RenderDevice` to the `Material` and `SpecializedMaterial` trait `::key()` functions to allow setting flags on the keys depending on feature/limit availability
- Make `GpuPointLights` and `ViewClusterBuffers` into enums containing `UniformVec` and `StorageBuffer` variants. Implement the necessary API on them to make usage the same for both cases, and the only difference is at initialisation time.
- Appropriate shader defs in the shader code to handle the two cases
## Context on some decisions / open questions
- I'm using `max_storage_buffers_per_shader_stage >= 3` as a check to see if storage buffers are supported. I was thinking about diving into 'binding resource management' but it feels like we don't have enough use cases to understand the problem yet, and it is mostly a separate concern to this PR, so I think it should be handled separately.
- Should `ViewClusterBuffers` and `ViewClusterBindings` be merged, duplicating the count variables into the enum variants?
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
# Objective
- Fixes#3970
- To support Bevy's shader abstraction(shader defs, shader imports and hot shader reloading) for compute shaders, I have followed carts advice and change the `PipelinenCache` to accommodate both compute and render pipelines.
## Solution
- renamed `RenderPipelineCache` to `PipelineCache`
- Cached Pipelines are now represented by an enum (render, compute)
- split the `SpecializedPipelines` into `SpecializedRenderPipelines` and `SpecializedComputePipelines`
- updated the game of life example
## Open Questions
- should `SpecializedRenderPipelines` and `SpecializedComputePipelines` be merged and how would we do that?
- should the `get_render_pipeline` and `get_compute_pipeline` methods be merged?
- is pipeline specialization for different entry points a good pattern
Co-authored-by: Kurt Kühnert <51823519+Ku95@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
# Objective
- In the large majority of cases, users were calling `.unwrap()` immediately after `.get_resource`.
- Attempting to add more helpful error messages here resulted in endless manual boilerplate (see #3899 and the linked PRs).
## Solution
- Add an infallible variant named `.resource` and so on.
- Use these infallible variants over `.get_resource().unwrap()` across the code base.
## Notes
I did not provide equivalent methods on `WorldCell`, in favor of removing it entirely in #3939.
## Migration Guide
Infallible variants of `.get_resource` have been added that implicitly panic, rather than needing to be unwrapped.
Replace `world.get_resource::<Foo>().unwrap()` with `world.resource::<Foo>()`.
## Impact
- `.unwrap` search results before: 1084
- `.unwrap` search results after: 942
- internal `unwrap_or_else` calls added: 4
- trivial unwrap calls removed from tests and code: 146
- uses of the new `try_get_resource` API: 11
- percentage of the time the unwrapping API was used internally: 93%
This PR makes a number of changes to how meshes and vertex attributes are handled, which the goal of enabling easy and flexible custom vertex attributes:
* Reworks the `Mesh` type to use the newly added `VertexAttribute` internally
* `VertexAttribute` defines the name, a unique `VertexAttributeId`, and a `VertexFormat`
* `VertexAttributeId` is used to produce consistent sort orders for vertex buffer generation, replacing the more expensive and often surprising "name based sorting"
* Meshes can be used to generate a `MeshVertexBufferLayout`, which defines the layout of the gpu buffer produced by the mesh. `MeshVertexBufferLayouts` can then be used to generate actual `VertexBufferLayouts` according to the requirements of a specific pipeline. This decoupling of "mesh layout" vs "pipeline vertex buffer layout" is what enables custom attributes. We don't need to standardize _mesh layouts_ or contort meshes to meet the needs of a specific pipeline. As long as the mesh has what the pipeline needs, it will work transparently.
* Mesh-based pipelines now specialize on `&MeshVertexBufferLayout` via the new `SpecializedMeshPipeline` trait (which behaves like `SpecializedPipeline`, but adds `&MeshVertexBufferLayout`). The integrity of the pipeline cache is maintained because the `MeshVertexBufferLayout` is treated as part of the key (which is fully abstracted from implementers of the trait ... no need to add any additional info to the specialization key).
* Hashing `MeshVertexBufferLayout` is too expensive to do for every entity, every frame. To make this scalable, I added a generalized "pre-hashing" solution to `bevy_utils`: `Hashed<T>` keys and `PreHashMap<K, V>` (which uses `Hashed<T>` internally) . Why didn't I just do the quick and dirty in-place "pre-compute hash and use that u64 as a key in a hashmap" that we've done in the past? Because its wrong! Hashes by themselves aren't enough because two different values can produce the same hash. Re-hashing a hash is even worse! I decided to build a generalized solution because this pattern has come up in the past and we've chosen to do the wrong thing. Now we can do the right thing! This did unfortunately require pulling in `hashbrown` and using that in `bevy_utils`, because avoiding re-hashes requires the `raw_entry_mut` api, which isn't stabilized yet (and may never be ... `entry_ref` has favor now, but also isn't available yet). If std's HashMap ever provides the tools we need, we can move back to that. Note that adding `hashbrown` doesn't increase our dependency count because it was already in our tree. I will probably break these changes out into their own PR.
* Specializing on `MeshVertexBufferLayout` has one non-obvious behavior: it can produce identical pipelines for two different MeshVertexBufferLayouts. To optimize the number of active pipelines / reduce re-binds while drawing, I de-duplicate pipelines post-specialization using the final `VertexBufferLayout` as the key. For example, consider a pipeline that needs the layout `(position, normal)` and is specialized using two meshes: `(position, normal, uv)` and `(position, normal, other_vec2)`. If both of these meshes result in `(position, normal)` specializations, we can use the same pipeline! Now we do. Cool!
To briefly illustrate, this is what the relevant section of `MeshPipeline`'s specialization code looks like now:
```rust
impl SpecializedMeshPipeline for MeshPipeline {
type Key = MeshPipelineKey;
fn specialize(
&self,
key: Self::Key,
layout: &MeshVertexBufferLayout,
) -> RenderPipelineDescriptor {
let mut vertex_attributes = vec![
Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_POSITION.at_shader_location(0),
Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_NORMAL.at_shader_location(1),
Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_UV_0.at_shader_location(2),
];
let mut shader_defs = Vec::new();
if layout.contains(Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_TANGENT) {
shader_defs.push(String::from("VERTEX_TANGENTS"));
vertex_attributes.push(Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_TANGENT.at_shader_location(3));
}
let vertex_buffer_layout = layout
.get_layout(&vertex_attributes)
.expect("Mesh is missing a vertex attribute");
```
Notice that this is _much_ simpler than it was before. And now any mesh with any layout can be used with this pipeline, provided it has vertex postions, normals, and uvs. We even got to remove `HAS_TANGENTS` from MeshPipelineKey and `has_tangents` from `GpuMesh`, because that information is redundant with `MeshVertexBufferLayout`.
This is still a draft because I still need to:
* Add more docs
* Experiment with adding error handling to mesh pipeline specialization (which would print errors at runtime when a mesh is missing a vertex attribute required by a pipeline). If it doesn't tank perf, we'll keep it.
* Consider breaking out the PreHash / hashbrown changes into a separate PR.
* Add an example illustrating this change
* Verify that the "mesh-specialized pipeline de-duplication code" works properly
Please dont yell at me for not doing these things yet :) Just trying to get this in peoples' hands asap.
Alternative to #3120Fixes#3030
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
