[PATCH 4/7] d3d10/effect: Handle static variable assignments for object fields in state objects.

[Matteo Bruni]

On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 7:42 AM Nikolay Sivov <nsivov at codeweavers.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10/13/21 2:48 PM, Matteo Bruni wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 7:13 AM Nikolay Sivov <nsivov at codeweavers.com> wrote:
> >> Signed-off-by: Nikolay Sivov <nsivov at codeweavers.com>
> >> ---
> >>  dlls/d3d10/effect.c       |  95 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >>  dlls/d3d10/tests/effect.c | 128 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> >>  2 files changed, 182 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/dlls/d3d10/effect.c b/dlls/d3d10/effect.c
> >> index 6cc51aa00e3..1e144bb1c56 100644
> >> --- a/dlls/d3d10/effect.c
> >> +++ b/dlls/d3d10/effect.c
> >> @@ -1669,13 +1669,59 @@ static BOOL read_value_list(const char *data, size_t data_size, DWORD offset,
> >>      return TRUE;
> >>  }
> >>
> >> +static BOOL is_object_property(const struct d3d10_effect_state_property_info *property_info)
> >> +{
> >> +    switch (property_info->type)
> >> +    {
> >> +        case D3D10_SVT_RASTERIZER:
> >> +        case D3D10_SVT_DEPTHSTENCIL:
> >> +        case D3D10_SVT_BLEND:
> >> +        case D3D10_SVT_RENDERTARGETVIEW:
> >> +        case D3D10_SVT_DEPTHSTENCILVIEW:
> >> +        case D3D10_SVT_VERTEXSHADER:
> >> +        case D3D10_SVT_PIXELSHADER:
> >> +        case D3D10_SVT_GEOMETRYSHADER:
> >> +        case D3D10_SVT_TEXTURE:
> >> +            return TRUE;
> >> +        default:
> >> +            return FALSE;
> >> +    }
> >> +}
> > I don't know if, or how much, this list of object types is going to
> > grow but it might be easier to list the numeric types instead.
> It won't grow. But yes, there are ways to improve either size or
> readability. It could list scalar types instead, or property ids.
> Or properties could be marked in static table instead with some flag.
> >
> >> @@ -2329,7 +2418,7 @@ static HRESULT parse_fx10_object_variable(const char *data, size_t data_size,
> >>
> >>                      memcpy(&var->u.state.desc, storage_info->default_state, storage_info->size);
> >>                      if (!parse_fx10_state_group(data, data_size, ptr, get_var_container_type(var),
> >> -                            &var->u.state.desc))
> >> +                            var->effect, &var->u.state.desc))
> > Probably at some point we should introduce an explicit variable field
> > in struct d3d10_effect_state_object_variable instead of abusing the
> > other fields of the desc union.
> I don't understand what you're suggesting. To have a separate storage to
> write to, instead of a union?

Not necessarily; what I was thinking is adding a new "struct
d3d10_effect_variable *variable;" entry to the desc member of struct
d3d10_effect_state_object_variable (or perhaps to a new union with
desc as the other member). Assuming I understand how this is supposed
to be used eventually.

I see now that probably I should have put the comment right below the
"*(void **)dst = variable;" line instead.