[PATCH 1/5] d3dx9: Avoid casting each value separately in set_constants().

[Paul Gofman]

On 06/09/2017 10:14 PM, Matteo Bruni wrote:
> 2017-06-09 20:55 GMT+02:00 Paul Gofman <gofmanp at gmail.com>:
>
> That would break in patch 2/5 (if it isn't updated accordingly)
> though, as I mentioned.
Yes, sure, I will update the code accordingly in this patchset to do 
memcpy when it is required only.
>
>
> The assertion I envision would check that both the source and the
> destination data type have size == sizeof(unsigned int), which is what
> you're depending on. It could be a static assert (see e.g.
> C_ASSERT()), in principle.
So I will put something like C_ASSERT(sizeof(BOOL) == sizeof(unsigned 
int) && sizeof(float) == sizeof(unsigned int) ...) in set_constants(), 
is it ok?
>
>>>>                    }
>>>>                }
>>>>                start_offset += get_offset_reg(table,
>>>> const_set->register_count);
>>>>                data += param->rows * param->columns;
>>>>            }
>>>> +        start_offset = get_offset_reg(table, const_set->register_index);
>>>> +        regstore_set_data(rs, table, start_offset, (unsigned int
>>>> *)rs->tables[table] + start_offset,
>>>> +                get_offset_reg(table, const_set->register_count) *
>>>> const_set->element_count, param_type);
>>> I understand that you want to avoid to use some separate storage for
>>> the "to be converted" data but, like above, this regstore table
>>> pointer cast makes me a bit uncomfortable.
>>>
>> Or yeah, I really want to avoid extra storage for conversion, it adds extra
>> memory access and affects performance a bit (I had such variant as a first
>> time implementation). Same as above, it is essentially the same as it was
>> before, just previously it was a single "unsigned int out;" while now it is
>> an array. Maybe then I will add runtime check (or preprocessor check) in
>> initialization that all the supported types really have the same size as
>> 'unsigned int'?
> Yeah, that's the "assert" I want. Not sure what's the best form for
> that, it doesn't necessarily have to be an assert().
>
I will update the patchset probably in a few days, as I am away now.