Refactor: Improve access to object data bounds #113465
No reviewers
Sergey Sharybin
Labels
No Label
Interest
Alembic
Interest
Animation & Rigging
Interest
Asset Browser
Interest
Asset Browser Project Overview
Interest
Audio
Interest
Automated Testing
Interest
Blender Asset Bundle
Interest
BlendFile
Interest
Collada
Interest
Compatibility
Interest
Compositing
Interest
Core
Interest
Cycles
Interest
Dependency Graph
Interest
Development Management
Interest
EEVEE
Interest
EEVEE & Viewport
Interest
Freestyle
Interest
Geometry Nodes
Interest
Grease Pencil
Interest
ID Management
Interest
Images & Movies
Interest
Import Export
Interest
Line Art
Interest
Masking
Interest
Metal
Interest
Modeling
Interest
Modifiers
Interest
Motion Tracking
Interest
Nodes & Physics
Interest
OpenGL
Interest
Overlay
Interest
Overrides
Interest
Performance
Interest
Physics
Interest
Pipeline, Assets & IO
Interest
Platforms, Builds & Tests
Interest
Python API
Interest
Render & Cycles
Interest
Render Pipeline
Interest
Sculpt, Paint & Texture
Interest
Text Editor
Interest
Translations
Interest
Triaging
Interest
Undo
Interest
USD
Interest
User Interface
Interest
UV Editing
Interest
VFX & Video
Interest
Video Sequencer
Interest
Virtual Reality
Interest
Vulkan
Interest
Wayland
Interest
Workbench
Interest: X11
Legacy
Blender 2.8 Project
Legacy
Milestone 1: Basic, Local Asset Browser
Legacy
OpenGL Error
Meta
Good First Issue
Meta
Papercut
Meta
Retrospective
Meta
Security
Module
Animation & Rigging
Module
Core
Module
Development Management
Module
EEVEE & Viewport
Module
Grease Pencil
Module
Modeling
Module
Nodes & Physics
Module
Pipeline, Assets & IO
Module
Platforms, Builds & Tests
Module
Python API
Module
Render & Cycles
Module
Sculpt, Paint & Texture
Module
Triaging
Module
User Interface
Module
VFX & Video
Platform
FreeBSD
Platform
Linux
Platform
macOS
Platform
Windows
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Normal
Priority
Unbreak Now!
Status
Archived
Status
Confirmed
Status
Duplicate
Status
Needs Info from Developers
Status
Needs Information from User
Status
Needs Triage
Status
Resolved
Type
Bug
Type
Design
Type
Known Issue
Type
Patch
Type
Report
Type
To Do
No Milestone
No project
No Assignees
2 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: blender/blender#113465
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
No description provided.
Delete Branch "HooglyBoogly/blender:fix-bb-threadsafe"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Currently object bounds (
object.runtime.bb) are lazily initializedwhen accessed. This access happens from arbitrary threads, and
is unprotected by a mutex. This can cause access to stale data at
best, and crashes at worst. Eager calculation is meant to keep this
working, but it's fragile.
Since
e8f4010611, geometry bounds are cached in the geometryitself, which makes this object-level cache redundant. So, it's clearer
to build the
BoundBoxfrom those cached bounds and return it byvalue, without interacting with the object's cached bounding box.
The code change is is mostly a move from
const BoundBox *tostd::optional<BoundBox>. This is only one step of a larger changedescribed in #96968. Followup steps would include switching to
a simpler and smaller
Boundstype, removing redundant object-level access, and eventually removing
object.runtime.bb.Access of bounds from the object for mesh, curves, and point cloud
objects should now be thread-safe. Other object types still lazily
initialize the object
BoundBoxcache since they don't havea data-level cache.
@blender-bot build
b39066b03btof42275882fThis is a solution to avoid redrawing the depth buffer for each Zoom with `Auto Depth`. The solution is to move the `ED_view3d_depth_override` function out of `ED_view3d_autodist`. `ED_view3d_depth_override` is now only called for navigation operations if it does not meet the following condition: ``` bool has_depth_buffer = !(v3d->flag2 & V3D_HIDE_OVERLAYS) || ELEM(v3d->shading.type, OB_SOLID, OB_MATERIAL) || XRAY_FLAG_ENABLED(v3d) || v3d->shading.type == OB_RENDER && (strcmp(DEG_get_evaluated_scene(depsgraph)->r.engine, RE_engine_id_BLENDER_EEVEE) == 0 || strcmp(DEG_get_evaluated_scene(depsgraph)->r.engine, RE_engine_id_BLENDER_WORKBENCH) == 0); ```The goal here is to make it easier to use the socket declaration builder for cases where the actual socket type is not known at compile time. For that purpose, all the methods that are not dependent on the specific socket type are moved to the base socket declaration builder. A nice side effect of this is reduced templated boilerplate and that more code can be moved out of the header. With this patch, one is now forced to put type specific method calls before generic method calls in a chain. For example `.default_value(...).supports_field()` instead of `supports_field().default_value(...)`. In theory, we could keep support for both orders but that would involve a lot of additional boilerplate code. Enforcing this order is simple enough. Note that this limitation only applies when chaining multiple method calls. This is still possible: ``` auto &decl = b.add_input<decl::Vector>("Value"); decl.supports_field(); decl.default_value(...); ``` Pull Request: #113410Fix #111120: Unsafe access to object boundsto Fix #111120: Unsafe access to object boundsFix #111120: Unsafe access to object boundsto Refactor: Improve access to object data boundsOn a code level seems fine. And it definitely moves us towards the initial idea of 2.8 where we wanted clear separation between evaluated and original state! That's great!
From the in-person discussion a driver which uses "dimensions" object property might need extra care. From reading the code it does not seem to be a problem, but before we go further in removing the Object->runtime->bb it is definitely something to keep in mind.
We can/should add a render test to catch this type of issues. Maybe we can have depsgraph test which renders images! (Similar to Cycles/EEVEE tests, just have them in depsgraph folder).
Assume you tested the patch well. If not let me know and I'll dig into applying it and running some tests locally. Otherwise just go ahead, I guess.
@blender-bot build