As mentioned in my previous post I spent the past month-ish working on improving both the rendering capabilities and performance of tray_rust. While it’s not yet capable of path tracing we can at least have light and shadow and shade our objects with diffuse or specularly reflective and/or transmissive materials. Along with this I’ve improved performance by parallelizing the rendering process using Rust’s multithreading capabilities. Although ray tracing is a trivially parallel task there are two pieces of state that must be shared and modified between threads: the pixel/block counter and the framebuffer. With Rust’s strong focus on safety I was worried that I would have to resort to unsafe blocks to share these small pieces of mutable state but I found that the std::sync module provided safe methods for everything I needed and performs quite well. While it’s difficult to compare against tray (my initial C++ version) as the design of tray_rust has diverged quite a bit I’ll put some performance numbers in the multithreading section.
The material system used in PBRT makes heavy use of memory arenas to avoid making lots of small allocations of the various BxDFs that the BSDF for the surface is composed of during rendering. Instead large blocks of memory are allocated up front and the small allocations needed during rendering are made by marking sections in these regions as used. The memory is re-used by marking everything free again once we’ve finished tracing an eye ray since we don’t need to preserve any of this information across primary rays. From some discussion in the Hacker News thread for part 1 it sounds like it isn’t currently possible to implement a memory pool in Rust although it is being worked on. There is the std::arena module but I’m not sure if it meets my needs. It may be possible now to write something similar to the memory pool I used in tray based off the implementation of the generic Arena allocator in std::arena, I’ll have to investigate further. Do let me know if you have any thoughts in this area!
To get around this for now without introducing a lot of allocations during rendering I chose to have the materials allocate a Vec of their BxDFs when they’re created and then return BSDFs that just refer to these BxDFs. We do still need to allocate a BSDF on the stack each time and return it (via moving) when getting the surface properties for an object but this isn’t too expensive.
Since a surface’s properties can be defined through a combination of BxDFs we need to consider contributions from all of them to determine the color of the surface when shading some intersection. Additionally we need to filter them to only consider those that are relevant to the current lighting calculation, eg. if we’re computing reflected light we wouldn’t want to waste time evaluating transmissive BxDFs. Using the std::iter module we can perform these operations cleanly and safely without running into any bounds checking overhead that we would have when accessing a Vec by index. As a simple example the following snippet returns the number of BxDFs that match some set of BxDF type flags.
A more interesting example is taken from the
BSDF::eval method. This method computes the contribution of all BxDFs
for some pair of incident and outgoing light directions and returns the total color.
It’s worth mentioning that the current BSDF implementation is incredibly naive, since the only currently supported materials are either diffuse, specularly reflective or specularly reflective and transmissive they only have a single component per light interaction (reflection or transmission) and we can get away without doing any random sampling of the BSDF components. When path tracing is implemented and more complex materials are added this will have to be fixed, however it won’t change the above code listing by much.
Iterators combined with lambdas and closures make for some very powerful functionality. Similar expressions can of course be written in C++11/14 using lambdas and the corresponding methods from the algorithms library, although I’m not sure if there’s similar functionality to filter and filter_map provided by the C++ standard library.
If we take a slight tangent away from materials for a moment, we find that we can even express the operation of checking a ray for intersection with all the instances of geometry in the scene as a fold operation! By capturing the ray as a mutable borrow in the closure and modifying its max_t member after each intersection we can use the following to find the nearest intersection and return it, or None if nothing was hit.
Using this method I’ve also chosen a fix for the poor design decision I made last time. Following from some helpful discussion in the comments on part 1, Reddit, Hacker News and IRC I’ve made the Geometry trait and Instance struct return different types from their intersect methods and will instead implement the BVH to take types that implement a Boundable trait. Traversal will then be done by returning an iterator that traverses the BVH and iterates over all potentially intersected objects. The caller can then perform whatever operations it likes over the objects returned by the iterator, be it intersection testing on Geometry or Instances or anything really.
While ray tracing is an extremely easy problem to parallelize there’s still room for some interesting implementations, and I think the one I’ve gone with is pretty neat and leaves the door open for even more fun. It’s possible to write a ray tracer that doesn’t do any synchronization by assigning threads their work up front and having them only write to disjoint regions of the framebuffer, but this design doesn’t do a very good job of load balancing (what if one thread gets all the hard pixels?) and makes it very difficult to implement reconstruction filtering (now samples affect adjacent pixels as well, and the regions are no longer disjoint). To have a robust and high quality renderer it’s worth it to support this minimal level of synchronization between threads, to avoid hurting performance too much this synchronization should be kept as lightweight as possible, ideally using only atomics.
In tray I followed PBRT and implemented the framebuffer using atomic floats with C++’s
std::atomic<float> type, updating pixel values
using compare exchange loops. This same method is also possible to implement in Rust by either directly using the LLVM intrinsics
or working through the
AtomicUsize type to create an atomic float
std::atomic<float>. To implement the atomic float method I would still need to write some minor bits of unsafe code to
transmute the bits of the float to a usize to go through AtomicUsize, so I decided to try Rust’s safe lock-free multi-producer
single-consumer channel in std::sync::mpsc first,
as this wouldn’t require any unsafe code on my end. I still chose to divide up work in the same way I did previously with an array
of block start positions which are indexed by an atomic uint (AtomicUsize in Rust), each thread just does a fetch add to find
the next block to work on and returns when there are none left.
To render the scene I spawn a number of worker threads and hand each of them a send end of the mpsc channel where they will write their sample results, sending the x, y position and color of the sample. The receive end of the channel is held onto by the main thread which reads samples from the channel and writes them to the framebuffer until all send ends have closed. This implementation provides some interesting trade-offs with the atomic float framebuffer method, instead of conflicting on every channel of the pixel (RGB and weight) threads will only conflict on the two atomics in the channel when trying to send their samples. However if we aren’t doing reconstruction filtering then the threads in the atomic float method never conflict and just pay the cost of a few atomic operations while in the channel implementation threads will conflict since they’re all still writing to the same channel. Another option I didn’t look into yet is to give each thread their own channel to write to and use select to read samples as they come in from each channel. If this would also be lock-free from the sender side then it’s possible this is an even better implementation since the worker threads don’t actually need to care about each others samples since they aren’t writing them to the framebuffer. I’d be interested to hear other people’s thoughts on this implementation.
The mpsc channel implementation does perform quite nicely, using 8 worker threads on my desktop with an i7-4790K @ 4GHz we can render the smallpt scene with one sample per pixel in 144ms! What’s even more exciting about the channel implementation is that it easily extends to support rendering across multiple machines on a network. Each thread on the worker machines would send their samples to a network thread which would batch up samples and send them to the master machine instead of directly to a framebuffer thread. These samples would then be received either by the master’s framebuffer thread directly or picked up on a network thread and sent through the same mpsc channel used by the worker threads. The overhead of setting up the network and communicating samples would probably take much more time than rendering our scene with a simple Whitted integrator but will be worth pursuing once path tracing is implemented. The code for the worker and framebuffer threads is located in main.rs.
There are a few stray black/white pixels in the image but I think these are just sampling artifacts and should be cleaned up once we start taking more than one sample per pixel. Here we’re just hitting an uncommon path where we get a black or white result, at least that’s what I hope is the case.
This version is also run without any architecture specific optimizations (to my knowledge) such as taking advantage of any available
SIMD instructions like you would get when compiling C or C++ with
-march=native. There is a flag to pass to rustc to
enable these optimizations however I’m not sure how to pass it to rustc through Cargo.
It looks to currently be an open issue, #544 and
#1137, if it is possible now please do let me know.
I’d expect at least some performance gain with the use of auto-vectorization and SSE/AVX instructions.
In a ray tracer we also need to share some immutable data between threads so that they all know what scene they’re rendering. In Rust this is done with atomic reference counted pointers using the Arc struct. This works pretty nicely although I ran into some minor annoyances. Currently if you want to put a trait in an Arc it must be in a Box as well, even though the Arc has it’s own box (this may have changed with unsized types, see below). That is to say if we had a trait Geometry and we wanted to share some instance between threads we can’t currently write:
Additionally it’s not possible to immutably borrow an object across multiple threads even if it can be proven that the object being borrowed outlives all the threads. From what I’ve been told both of these issues are being worked on, the Arc<Trait> type might actually be possible now with unsized types but I’ve had some difficulty finding reading material on how to use these. If anyone has a link to a good write-up on unsized types it’d be much appreciated, or I’ll bug folks in IRC for info about it. As for sharing Arcs vs. immutable borrows (what I did in the C++ version) I think I prefer using Arcs even though both methods should be valid to write in the language eventually. Note that we don’t have any overhead from updating the reference count during rendering since we can immutably borrow within the thread to refer to hit geometry and instances.
In addition to helping build your project, its docs, and run tests Cargo is also a powerful dependency management tool. During some of the updates to Rust the more experimental and niche modules such as EnumSet got moved out into collect-rs, getting this crate and linking my project was really easy to do by adding the package as a dependency with Cargo. It’s also possible to depend on git repositories as I’ve done with image by specifying a git dependency, so now tray_rust can output PNG and JPEG images!
For executables Cargo also locks the versions of your dependencies so others trying to build your project will build with the same versions of the libraries you’re building with, making it smoother to build other people’s packages and programs. It even works well on Windows which is always a bit of a hassle when trying to manage C or C++ dependencies. Rust is still quite young and the ecosystem is very small compared to C and C++ so the comparison isn’t really fair but I’m hopeful that Cargo will keep dependency management painless even as the ecosystem grows.
After working with Rust for longer I’m pretty happy with how the language is shaping up. To name a few features I had fun with over the past month, match expressions and the powerful iterator module are really nice to work with. The community is also very friendly and helpful, the Rust IRC and subreddit have been great resources over the past month and This Week in Rust is invaluable when keeping up with changes in the nightlies or just finding cool Rust related write-ups and discussion.
For part 3 I’ll work on getting a proper path tracing implementation running and fix some lingering bugs in the current code that I’ve worked around to render the scene for this post. I’ll also take a look at the performance of giving each thread its own channel vs. a shared mpsc and possibilities for rendering across multiple machines. Path tracing will need much more compute power to render the scene quickly and networked rendering should be really fun to play with.
If you have comments, suggestions for improvements or just want to say “hi” feel free to comment below, tweet at me or ping me on IRC (I’m Twinklebear on freenode and moznet). The code for the Rust ray tracer is MIT licensed and available on Github.
Published: 30 January 2015