RFC: d3d8 refcount implementation

[Markus Amsler]

H. Verbeet wrote:
> On 14/11/06, Markus Amsler <markus.amsler at oribi.org> wrote:
>> The implicit surfaces now gets released if the refcount is -1. Somehow
>> we have to force releasing d3d8 sufaces from wined3d. No idea how.
> You could probably either force the refcount to 0 (ie, something like
> "while(IWineD3DSurface_Release(surface));"), 
I'm not sure what you mean. IWineD3DSurface_Release won't release the 
d3d8 surface. Besides, the surface shouldn't be released with 
refcount==0, only on device destruction.

> or add an explicit
> destructor to the d3d8 implementation. That's not too pretty either,
> but I suppose it's better than releasing on -1.
This would mean a wine specific d3d8 interface extension. I'm not sure 
whether that's  acceptable.
Perhaps we could misuse an existing function (e.g QueryInterface with a 
magic refiid, to destroy the surface, or set/get maigc private data).
Or handle implicit surface destruction in IDirect3DDevice8_Release and 
not in IWineD3DDevice_Uninit3D. There we could use our private d3d8 
destruct function. Looks for me like the way to go.

>> I added a flag to mark the implicit surfaces. It's redundant, because
>> wined3d knows the implicit surfaces. The other idea is calling
>> GetRenderTarget and friends in Surface_(AddRef/Release). Besides the
>> problem of an endless recursion, it would be quite an overhead.
> Shouldn't we just check if the surface's container is the same as the
> surface's device?
For d3d8 this would be a nice solution. But in d3d9 the implicit 
RenderTarget's container is the swapchain. I think we should handle d3d8 
and d3d9 the same way.

> Totally unrelated to this, are you ever on IRC?
Not yet, but I could. Is it easier to discuss such stuff on IRC?