Hi,
While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures.
Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be
wrong, but could you please double-check?
Full results can be found at
https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=24540
Your paranoid android.
=== wvistau64 (32 bit device) ===
device: unhandled exception 00000879 at 75A2E743
=== w2008s64 (32 bit device) ===
device: unhandled exception 00000879 at 7680E743
=== w7u (32 bit device) ===
device: unhandled exception c0000005 at 00406895
=== w7pro64 (32 bit device) ===
device: unhandled exception c0000005 at 00406895
=== w8 (32 bit device) ===
device: unhandled exception c0000005 at 00406895
=== w864 (32 bit device) ===
device: unhandled exception c0000005 at 00406895
=== w1064 (32 bit device) ===
device: unhandled exception c0000005 at 00406895
=== wvistau64 (64 bit device) ===
device: unhandled exception 00000879 at 000000007765674D
=== w2008s64 (64 bit device) ===
device: unhandled exception 00000879 at 0000000076EA674D
=== w7pro64 (64 bit device) ===
device: unhandled exception c0000005 at 0000000000405C40
=== w864 (64 bit device) ===
device: unhandled exception c0000005 at 0000000000405C40
=== w1064 (64 bit device) ===
device: unhandled exception c0000005 at 0000000000405C40
Hi,
While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures.
Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be
wrong, but could you please double-check?
Full results can be found at
https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=24539
Your paranoid android.
=== w8 (32 bit visual) ===
visual.c:1688: Test failed: Expected buffer mapped unsyncronized. Flags = DDLOCK_NOOVERWRITE. dwCaps = 0x10000.
visual.c:1688: Test failed: Expected buffer mapped unsyncronized. Flags = DDLOCK_NOOVERWRITE | DDLOCK_DISCARDCONTENTS. dwCaps = 0x10000.
visual.c:1688: Test failed: Expected buffer mapped unsyncronized. Flags = DDLOCK_NOOVERWRITE | DDLOCK_READONLY. dwCaps = 0x10000.
=== w864 (32 bit visual) ===
visual.c:307: Test failed: Clear rectangle 3(pos, neg) has color 0000ff00
visual.c:309: Test failed: Clear rectangle 1(pos, pos) has color 0000ff00
visual.c:311: Test failed: Clear rectangle 4(NULL) has color 0000ff00
visual.c:313: Test failed: Clear rectangle 4(neg, neg) has color 0000ff00
visual.c:1688: Test failed: Expected buffer mapped unsyncronized. Flags = DDLOCK_NOOVERWRITE. dwCaps = 0x10000.
visual.c:1688: Test failed: Expected buffer mapped unsyncronized. Flags = DDLOCK_NOOVERWRITE | DDLOCK_DISCARDCONTENTS. dwCaps = 0x10000.
visual.c:1688: Test failed: Expected buffer mapped unsyncronized. Flags = DDLOCK_NOOVERWRITE | DDLOCK_READONLY. dwCaps = 0x10000.
=== w1064 (32 bit visual) ===
visual.c:307: Test failed: Clear rectangle 3(pos, neg) has color 0000ff00
visual.c:309: Test failed: Clear rectangle 1(pos, pos) has color 0000ff00
visual.c:311: Test failed: Clear rectangle 4(NULL) has color 0000ff00
visual.c:313: Test failed: Clear rectangle 4(neg, neg) has color 0000ff00
visual.c:1688: Test failed: Expected buffer mapped unsyncronized. Flags = DDLOCK_NOOVERWRITE. dwCaps = 0x10000.
visual.c:1688: Test failed: Expected buffer mapped unsyncronized. Flags = DDLOCK_NOOVERWRITE | DDLOCK_DISCARDCONTENTS. dwCaps = 0x10000.
visual.c:1688: Test failed: Expected buffer mapped unsyncronized. Flags = DDLOCK_NOOVERWRITE | DDLOCK_READONLY. dwCaps = 0x10000.
2016-07-22 12:28 GMT+02:00 Józef Kucia <jkucia(a)codeweavers.com>:
> + if (!gl_info->supported[ARB_DERIVATIVE_CONTROL])
> + {
> + FIXME("OpenGL implementation does not support ARB_derivative_control.\n");
> + return;
> + }
What about using the generic dFdx()/dFdy() builtins (maybe with a
WARN) for the coarse and fine variants when ARB_derivative_control
isn't supported?
I don't know that it's particularly relevant in practice, it just
seems something we don't need to strictly depend on.
2016-07-25 10:24 GMT+02:00 Andrey Gusev <andrey.goosev(a)gmail.com>:
>
> + TRACE("pout %p, pv %p, pviewport %p, pprojection %p, pview %p, pworld %p\n", pout, pv, pviewport, pprojection, pview, pworld);
While you're there, can you please clean up the function? Like
dropping all the 'p' prefixes from the function arguments and using
the current d3d style for the function body. Also the TRACE line seems
a bit too long.
2016-07-21 11:06 GMT+02:00 Alistair Leslie-Hughes <leslie_alistair(a)hotmail.com>:
> -HRESULT WINAPI D3DXFillTextureTX(struct IDirect3DTexture9 *texture, const DWORD *function,
> - const D3DXVECTOR4 *constants, UINT numconstants);
> -HRESULT WINAPI D3DXFillCubeTextureTX(struct IDirect3DCubeTexture9 *cube, const DWORD *function,
> - const D3DXVECTOR4 *constants, UINT numconstants);
> -HRESULT WINAPI D3DXFillVolumeTextureTX(struct IDirect3DVolumeTexture9 *volume, const DWORD *function,
> - const D3DXVECTOR4 *constants, UINT numconstants);
> +HRESULT WINAPI D3DXFillTextureTX(struct IDirect3DTexture9 *texture, ID3DXTextureShader *texture_shader);
> +HRESULT WINAPI D3DXFillCubeTextureTX(struct IDirect3DCubeTexture9 *cube, ID3DXTextureShader *texture_shader);
> +HRESULT WINAPI D3DXFillVolumeTextureTX(struct IDirect3DVolumeTexture9 *volume, ID3DXTextureShader *texture_shader);
Do you know where the old prototypes came from? In all the versions of
the header I have around (which go back to _30) I see the "new"
prototype but it's possible that it changed even further back.
It's also possible these have always been wrong, although that seems
somewhat unlikely to me.
+ * Copyright (C) 2007 David Adam
+ * Copyright (C) 2007 Tony Wasserka
Did these people actually contribute anything to this patch?
+/* This guaud is the same as D3DX9 to prevent double-inclusion */
Did you mean "guard"?
Also, D3DX_CPU_OPTIMIZATION was already defined in d3dx9_30_main.c. I
would remove the old definition from d3dx9_30_main.c and make it
include d3dx10math.h instead.
-Alex