Question on Conformance Test

Stefan Dösinger stefandoesinger at
Wed Apr 27 17:28:08 CDT 2011

On Wednesday 27 April 2011 18:05:59 Austin English wrote:
> Normal practice is to try to match the XP+ behavior, and mark NT as
> broken if it differs.
In d3d we prefer results that some applications depend on. E.g. Windows XP has 
pretty relaxed or no error checking on IDirect3DVertexBuffer9::Lock, even 
though msdn says otherwise. Windows Vista added error checking as documented 
in the msdn. There are a few games out there that depend on the lack of error 
checking and crash on Windows Vista(or crashed at the time). We decided to 
replicate the behavior that kept the games working in Wine and mark the 
stricter check as broken()

If we don't know of any app that depends on the behavior we replicate the one 
that is nicer from an API design point of view and mark the others with 

If a result is clearly wrong(violates the docs, and doesn't make any sense) I 
mark it as broken if we don't know any "mainstream" app that depends on 
it(e.g. if the test was written to understand how something works). 
Alternatively we may just get rid of the test. If there's a mainstream app(ie, 
something you can buy in a shop, but not some random techdemo, tutorial or 
demoscene stuff) that depends on the behavior and this app doesn't work on this 
driver/Windows version I let the test fail. Sorry, your driver's broken, do 
not pass go, do not collect $200, do not pass the tests. This mostly applies 
to old hardware like my Radeon Mobility 9000, non-gaming hardware(Intel GPUs 
to a certain extend, rare stuff like Matrox cards) or outdated drivers.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <>

More information about the wine-devel mailing list