[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Public WebGL] WebVulkan



I think you're confusing how useful it would be for browsers to use Vulkan
internally from how useful it would be to expose it to JavaScript.

Sure, Vulkan's memory allocation features would benefit the browser
internally - but this doesn't necessarily mean that it would have to be
exposed to JavaScript.   There is no problem (in principle) with browsers
deciding to use Vulkan to implement WebGL and achieve all of the goals
you're talking about here.

I do believe that there would be value in exposing that stuff to
JavaScript - but not for this reason.

  -- Steve


Kearwood \"Kip\" Gilbert wrote:
> If the browser implements the Custom Host Allocator and keeps track of the
> explicit GPU side allocations through the WebVulkan API, then it should
> have more insight into the actual GPU and driver memory utilization of
> WebVulkan content.  This would enable the browser to better enforce limits
> on how many resources content can use and protect the user better from
> malicious or broken sites.
>
> What in particular about the WebVulkan memory model do people feel is
> incompatible with the web?
>
> Cheers,
> 	- Kearwood “Kip” Gilbert
>
>
>> On Aug 5, 2016, at 11:34 AM, Kearwood Kip Gilbert <kgilbert@mozilla.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> SPIRV supports multiple memory models, addressing models, Storage
>> Classes, etc…
>>
>> Perhaps we could define WebVulkan as supporting a subset of these?
>>
>> Also, GPU drivers provide cross-process isolation of the GPU memory.
>> Perhaps the browser could add an additional layer of security by
>> instantiating a separate GPU process for each WebVulkan context?  If we
>> depend on the GPU driver’s existing security models, would we need to
>> manage a blacklist of driver versions with known vulnerabilities?
>>
>> Thanks for the excellent discussion!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> 	- Kearwood “Kip” Gilbert
>>
>>> On Aug 5, 2016, at 10:33 AM, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com
>>> <mailto:pyalot@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 7:09 PM, Brandon Jones <bajones@google.com
>>> <mailto:bajones@google.com>> wrote:
>>> The memory model Vulkan exposes is simply not something we can do in
>>> the browser. That's not a subject that's up for debate, it's a fact.
>>> Come again? No? Why? How? What? Who decided that?
>>
>
>


 -- Steve


-----------------------------------------------------------
You are currently subscribed to public_webgl@khronos.org.
To unsubscribe, send an email to majordomo@khronos.org with
the following command in the body of your email:
unsubscribe public_webgl
-----------------------------------------------------------