[PATCH v3] d2d1: Make ID2D1Device::CreateImageBrush() accept only bitmap as a source image.

[Dmitry Timoshkov]

Nikolay Sivov <nsivov at codeweavers.com> wrote:

> > +static void d2d_brush_bind_bitmap(struct d2d_brush *brush, struct 
> > d2d_device_context *context,
> > +        unsigned int brush_idx)
> > +{
> > +    D2D1_IMAGE_BRUSH_PROPERTIES image_brush_desc;
> > +
> > +    image_brush_desc.sourceRectangle.left = 0.0f;
> > +    image_brush_desc.sourceRectangle.top = 0.0f;
> > +    image_brush_desc.sourceRectangle.right = 
> > brush->u.bitmap.bitmap->pixel_size.width;
> > +    image_brush_desc.sourceRectangle.bottom = 
> > brush->u.bitmap.bitmap->pixel_size.height;
> This needs a test, so we don't assume coordinate system here. We have 
> tests for filling with 4x4 bitmap brush, it will be a matter of creating 
> image brush with same bitmap, and rectangle as (0,0-4,4) vs (0,0-1,1). 
> If that shows no difference it means this is using normalized 
> coordinates, and we should initialize it here as (0,0-1,1).

I've added the test in the attached version of the patch, is that what you
had in mind? The test shows that (0,0-4,4) vs (0,0-1,1) source rectangles
lead to different painting results under Windows. However, since source
rectangle is completely ignored in current image brush implementation
that doesn't really change anything, so I'm not sure what kind of result
this test is supposed to have for the proposed patch.

> > @@ -1043,7 +1043,7 @@ static void STDMETHODCALLTYPE 
> > d2d_device_context_FillGeometry(ID2D1DeviceContext
> >      if (FAILED(context->error.code))
> >          return;
> >
> > -    if (opacity_brush && brush_impl->type != D2D_BRUSH_TYPE_BITMAP)
> > +    if (opacity_brush && !(brush_impl->type == D2D_BRUSH_TYPE_BITMAP 
> > || brush_impl->type == D2D_BRUSH_TYPE_IMAGE))
> >      {
> >          d2d_device_context_set_error(context, 
> > D2DERR_INCOMPATIBLE_BRUSH_TYPES);
> >          return;
> Same here, we have a test for this case already, that needs to be 
> extended to verify this change.

I guess you mean the tests in test_opacity_brush()? Anyway, it looks like
omitting this part of the patch changes nothing in my application, moreover
MSDN states that when the opacity brush is specified in FillGeometry() brush
must be an ID2D1BitmapBrush. So, this part is clearly wrong, and if desired
should be sent as a separate change.

Thanks again for the helpful comments.

-- 
Dmitry.
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: v2-0001-d2d1-Add-support-for-painting-image-brush-as-a-bi.patch
URL: <http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/attachments/20220607/ec030d80/attachment.ksh>