[Paraview] Paraview v5.0.0-RC1 with OpenGL2 backend not running using OSMESA v10.5.5

[Utkarsh Ayachit]

> Are there any updates to the Surface LIC issues with ParaView 5.0.x /
> OpenGL2?

I am afraid not. It's still on the TODO list. BTW, the issues with LIC
& OpenGL2 only affect cases with parallel rendering on more than 1
rank. If you're not using it in such a setup, you should be able to
switch to OpenGL2/5.0 without problem.

Utkarsh

>
> Is there a Bug that I should be following for this issue?
>
> My group uses Surface LIC a fair amount and we're encouraged by the
> performance increase of 5.0 over 4.4 so we'd really like to make the
> transition.
>
> Thank you,
> Andy
>
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Utkarsh Ayachit
> <utkarsh.ayachit at kitware.com> wrote:
>>
>> Frank,
>>
>> First of all, thanks for all your exhausting testing, it's greatly
>> appreciated!
>>
>> * OSMesa and MESA_GL_VERSION_OVERRIDE
>>
>> Communicating with the Mesa team, we learnt that
>> MESA_GL_VERSION_OVERRIDE is a bad idea since it doesnt' really create
>> the specified OpenGL context. Thus if anything tries to use features
>> from the specific OpenGL version, the rendering would crash and burn.
>> Working with Brian Paul from the Mesa team, Ken recently pushed a fix
>> to VTK (after the RC2) that uses new OSMesa API to create the correct
>> OpenGL context. This new OSMesa API will appear in Mesa 11.2, however.
>> Earlier version can be patched using the "alpha" patch that Brian
>> provided us (attached).
>>
>> * Classic v/s llvm
>>
>> Your observation is indeed correct. llvmpipe is the way to go for
>> software rendering. On my builds, classic mesa was painstakingly slow
>> for rendering even small geometries.
>>
>> * Issues with LIC
>>
>> Another correct observation. There are a few regressions in the new
>> implementation for SurfaceLIC. Realistically, we  may not be able to
>> address these before the 5.0 release. If you're using SurfaceLIC
>> heavily, I'd suggest building ParaView 5.0 with the older OpenGL
>> backend (or sticking with 4.4) for the interim.
>>
>> * OSMesa + SWR
>>
>> While currently I am not sure openswr+osmesa builds are possible, I
>> wouldn't be surprised if that on the roadmap. I am going to try to
>> contact the OpenSWR team to see if they have any thoughts on that.
>>
>> Utkarsh
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Powered by www.kitware.com
>>
>> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
>> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>>
>> Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at:
>> http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView
>>
>> Search the list archives at: http://markmail.org/search/?q=ParaView
>>
>> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
>> http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Powered by www.kitware.com
>
> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>
> Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at:
> http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView
>
> Search the list archives at: http://markmail.org/search/?q=ParaView
>
> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview
>