RFC - d3d9: Return success for UnlockRect attempts on already unlocked surfaces
Stefan Dösinger
stefandoesinger at gmail.com
Mon Oct 12 03:46:50 CDT 2015
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Am 2015-10-11 um 18:36 schrieb Bruno Jesus:
> - switch(hr)
> + if (hr == WINEDDERR_NOTLOCKED)
> {
> - case WINEDDERR_NOTLOCKED: return D3DERR_INVALIDCALL;
> - default: return hr;
> + TRACE("surface was not locked!\n");
> + hr = S_OK;
> }
Buffers already behave like this, but I believe we have a test that
shows surfaces and textures behave differently.
Either way what we need is a test for all d3d versions, from
dlls/ddraw/tests/ddraw1.c to d3d11. If all of them behave in the same
way we can return WINED3D_OK in wined3d, otherwise we'll have to catch
this in the client library.
I vaguely remember that there was some difference between
IDirect3DTexture9_LockRect and IDirect3DSurface9_LockRect on a surface
that was retrieved from that texture. It's also possible that there's a
difference between stand-alone surfaces and textures, and / or different
pools.
> Hi all, this is an attempt to fix bug 28874 [1]. The tests [2] run
> fine up to Windows 8, which unfortunately introduced a change in the
> behavior so I'm not sure how to handle this (broken?).
So Windows <= 7 have the behavior the game expects, whereas Windows 8
and 10 have a different behavior? Yeah, in this case accept the 8+
behavior as broken.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2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=kzKn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the wine-devel
mailing list