add Vulkan Profiles chapter and include it in navigation. #329
Conversation
…ion for consistency. Or the less professional way to say it: I'm lazy and know how to use python.
# Conflicts: # .github/scripts/check_chapter_references.py
christophe-lunarg
left a comment
christophe-lunarg
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I left a lot of comments.
Overall, I think it's great, I only think there is a little bit of confusion with the LunarG Desktop Baseline profiles, and the intent of the predefined profiles but probably that's something we need to think about to keep improving the Vulkan Profiles solution...
chapters/vulkan_profiles.adoc
Outdated
|
|
||
| === 1. Using the Vulkan Profiles header | ||
|
|
||
| The simplest way to use Vulkan Profiles is through the Vulkan Profiles header (`vulkan_profiles.hpp`), which is available in the link:https://vulkan.lunarg.com/sdk/home[Vulkan SDK]. This header provides a C++ API that simplifies working with profiles. The header is documented in the link:https://github.com/KhronosGroup/Vulkan-Profiles/blob/main/library/README.md[Vulkan-Profiles library documentation]: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In some way, I think we should not include vulkan_profiles.hpp in the Vulkan SDK. The issue is that I think this file is only useful to check whether profiles are supported on the user device.
Ideally for a Vulkan application initially code, we should only create VkDevice with the set of capabilities required by the application because theorically enabling capabilities that is not useful for the application may hurt the application performance. This is the case with the robustness extensions for example.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
conceptually I agree with you, but one of the features of profiles is to reduce the boilerplate for requesting features/extensions. So, a developer would need it to take advantage of the reduced boilerplate code; thus it would be useful to check the profiles both at time of development and at time of use. Sadly, if we didn't make it so easy to use, as opposed to the "by hand" method then we'd not have this issue.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am not implying that vulkan_profiles.hpp should not be used, I think it should be generated using the python script and the Vulkan application profiles.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Interesting. That would be a different approach and I think I see some merits for developers. Would you like me to suggest that strategy instead of getting it from the SDK or is this more future direction and we should revisit when it's ready?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think this is future direction as it has been avaiable from the first profiles tools release. Hence my idea that shipping the pre-generated vulkan_profiles.hpp created some confusions. There is a use for the pre-generated but not for release shipping Vulkan applications but for vulkancapsviewer for exemple to determine system capabilities.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am going to merge this PR anyway as it's already realy good but don't hesitate to submit more improvements ^_^
…ated links, and improved examples.
…bility and enhanced initialization guidance.
…ture Enabling" section, roadmap revisions, and improved initialization guidance.
…and corrected example link.
…ction, revised profile maintenance details, and additional documentation links.
gpx1000
dismissed stale reviews from SaschaWillems and christophe-lunarg
via
705d66f
| - Contains profile definitions, library code, and tools | ||
| * link:https://github.com/KhronosGroup/Vulkan-Samples/tree/main/samples/tooling/profiles[Vulkan-Samples profiles examples] | ||
| - Sample code demonstrating profile usage | ||
| * link:https://www.lunarg.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/The-Vulkan-Profiles-Tools-LunarG-Christophe-Riccio-02-01-2024.pdf[Vulkan Profiles pdf] |
3 participants
No description provided.