[PATCH 1/2] Add test for RedrawWindow with both validate and internal paint flags.

[Roman Pišl]

Signed-off-by: Roman Pišl <rpisl(a)seznam.cz>
---
 dlls/user32/tests/msg.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/dlls/user32/tests/msg.c b/dlls/user32/tests/msg.c
index f0e0d0fba76..689ad7161f5 100644
--- a/dlls/user32/tests/msg.c
+++ b/dlls/user32/tests/msg.c
@@ -140,7 +140,8 @@ typedef enum {
     hook=0x100,
     winevent_hook=0x200,
     kbd_hook=0x400,
-    winevent_hook_todo=0x800
+    winevent_hook_todo=0x800,
+    has_update=0x1000
 } msg_flags_t;
 
 struct message {
@@ -2819,6 +2820,10 @@ static void ok_sequence_(const struct message *expected_list, const char *contex
                 context, count, expected->message);
             if ((expected->flags & kbd_hook) != (actual->flags & kbd_hook)) dump++;
 
+        todo_wine_if(expected->flags & has_update)
+        ok_( file, line) (!(expected->flags & has_update) || (actual->flags & has_update),
+        "%s: %u: the msg 0x%04x should have update region\n", context, count, expected->message );
+
 	    expected++;
 	    actual++;
 	}
@@ -8270,6 +8275,11 @@ static const struct message WmPaint[] = {
     { 0 }
 };
 
+static const struct message WmPaintUpdate[] = {
+    { WM_PAINT, sent|has_update },
+    { 0 }
+};
+
 static const struct message WmParentOnlyPaint[] = {
     { WM_PAINT, sent|parent },
     { 0 }
@@ -8585,6 +8595,13 @@ static void test_paint_messages(void)
     RedrawWindow( hwnd, NULL, hrgn, RDW_VALIDATE | RDW_NOERASE | RDW_UPDATENOW );
     ok_sequence( WmPaint, "Paint", FALSE );
 
+    flush_sequence();
+    SetRectRgn( hrgn, 0, 0, 100, 100 );
+    RedrawWindow( hwnd, NULL, hrgn, RDW_INVALIDATE | RDW_ERASE );
+    SetRectRgn( hrgn, 0, 0, 50, 50 );
+    RedrawWindow( hwnd, NULL, hrgn, RDW_VALIDATE | RDW_NOERASE | RDW_UPDATENOW | RDW_NOFRAME );
+    ok_sequence( WmPaint, "Paint", FALSE );
+
     flush_sequence();
     SetRectRgn( hrgn, -4, -4, -2, -2 );
     RedrawWindow( hwnd, NULL, hrgn, RDW_INVALIDATE | RDW_FRAME );
@@ -8629,6 +8646,16 @@ static void test_paint_messages(void)
     }
     ok_sequence( WmGetUpdateRect, "GetUpdateRect", FALSE );
 
+    /* RedrawWindow with both RDW_VALIDATE and RDW_INTERNALPAINT triggers WM_PAINT with non-empty update region */
+    flush_sequence();
+    InvalidateRect( hwnd, NULL, FALSE );
+    GetClientRect( hwnd, &rect );
+    SetRectRgn(hrgn, rect.left, rect.top, rect.right, rect.bottom );
+    check_update_rgn( hwnd, hrgn );
+    RedrawWindow( hwnd, &rect, NULL, RDW_VALIDATE | RDW_NOERASE | RDW_UPDATENOW | RDW_NOFRAME | RDW_INTERNALPAINT );
+    check_update_rgn( hwnd, 0 );
+    ok_sequence( WmPaintUpdate, "PaintUpdate", FALSE );
+
     DestroyWindow( hwnd );
 
     /* now test with a child window */
@@ -9949,6 +9976,9 @@ static LRESULT MsgCheckProc (BOOL unicode, HWND hwnd, UINT message,
     msg.flags = sent|wparam|lparam;
     if (defwndproc_counter) msg.flags |= defwinproc;
     if (beginpaint_counter) msg.flags |= beginpaint;
+
+    if (message == WM_PAINT && GetUpdateRect(hwnd, NULL, FALSE)) msg.flags |= has_update;
+
     msg.wParam = wParam;
     msg.lParam = lParam;
     msg.descr = "MsgCheckProc";
-- 
2.30.2

[PATCH 2/2] server: Don't validate window region if RDW_INTERNALPAINT is present.

[Roman Pišl]

Wine-Bug: https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48761
Signed-off-by: Roman Pišl <rpisl(a)seznam.cz>
---
 dlls/user32/tests/msg.c | 1 -
 server/window.c         | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/dlls/user32/tests/msg.c b/dlls/user32/tests/msg.c
index 689ad7161f5..df468516862 100644
--- a/dlls/user32/tests/msg.c
+++ b/dlls/user32/tests/msg.c
@@ -2820,7 +2820,6 @@ static void ok_sequence_(const struct message *expected_list, const char *contex
                 context, count, expected->message);
             if ((expected->flags & kbd_hook) != (actual->flags & kbd_hook)) dump++;
 
-        todo_wine_if(expected->flags & has_update)
         ok_( file, line) (!(expected->flags & has_update) || (actual->flags & has_update),
         "%s: %u: the msg 0x%04x should have update region\n", context, count, expected->message );
 
diff --git a/server/window.c b/server/window.c
index 7675cd1103d..37e240190f8 100644
--- a/server/window.c
+++ b/server/window.c
@@ -1501,7 +1501,7 @@ static void redraw_window( struct window *win, struct region *region, int frame,
         if (flags & RDW_FRAME) win->paint_flags |= PAINT_NONCLIENT;
         if (flags & RDW_ERASE) win->paint_flags |= PAINT_ERASE;
     }
-    else if (flags & RDW_VALIDATE)
+    else if ((flags & RDW_VALIDATE) && !(flags & RDW_INTERNALPAINT))
     {
         if (!region && (flags & RDW_NOFRAME))  /* shortcut: validate everything */
         {
-- 
2.30.2

[Eric Pouech]

struct message {
> @@ -2819,6 +2820,10 @@ static void ok_sequence_(const struct message *expected_list, const char *contex
>                   context, count, expected->message);
>               if ((expected->flags & kbd_hook) != (actual->flags & kbd_hook)) dump++;
>
> +        todo_wine_if(expected->flags & has_update)
> +        ok_( file, line) (!(expected->flags & has_update) || (actual->flags & has_update),
> +        "%s: %u: the msg 0x%04x should have update region\n", context, count, expected->message );
> +
>       expected++;
>       actual++;
>   }

Hi Roman

please, don't outdent the todo_wine*

that generates warnings with mingw gcc 11.x

thanks

[Roman Pišl]

Hi Eric,

Dne 19. 02. 22 v 19:49 Eric Pouech napsal(a):
> struct message {
> > @@ -2819,6 +2820,10 @@ static void ok_sequence_(const struct message 
> > *expected_list, const char *contex
> >                   context, count, expected->message);
> >               if ((expected->flags & kbd_hook) != (actual->flags & 
> > kbd_hook)) dump++;
> > +        todo_wine_if(expected->flags & has_update)
> > +        ok_( file, line) (!(expected->flags & has_update) || 
> > (actual->flags & has_update),
> > +        "%s: %u: the msg 0x%04x should have update region\n", 
> > context, count, expected->message );
> > +
> >           expected++;
> >           actual++;
> >       }
>
> Hi Roman
>
> please, don't outdent the todo_wine*
>
> that generates warnings with mingw gcc 11.x
>
> thanks

unfortunately this code mixes tabs and spaces in a very ugly way - it 
indents by 4 but tab size is expected to be 8. I'll fix it in the next 
version after review..

Or would a patch that removes completely all tabs from the file be 
acceptable?

Thanks

Roman

[Eric Pouech]

Le 19/02/2022 à 20:38, Roman Pišl a écrit :
> Hi Eric,
>
> Dne 19. 02. 22 v 19:49 Eric Pouech napsal(a):
> > struct message {
> > > @@ -2819,6 +2820,10 @@ static void ok_sequence_(const struct message 
> > > *expected_list, const char *contex
> > >                   context, count, expected->message);
> > >               if ((expected->flags & kbd_hook) != (actual->flags & 
> > > kbd_hook)) dump++;
> > > +        todo_wine_if(expected->flags & has_update)
> > > +        ok_( file, line) (!(expected->flags & has_update) || 
> > > (actual->flags & has_update),
> > > +        "%s: %u: the msg 0x%04x should have update region\n", 
> > > context, count, expected->message );
> > > +
> > >           expected++;
> > >           actual++;
> > >       }
> >
> > Hi Roman
> >
> > please, don't outdent the todo_wine*
> >
> > that generates warnings with mingw gcc 11.x
> >
> > thanks
>
> unfortunately this code mixes tabs and spaces in a very ugly way - it 
> indents by 4 but tab size is expected to be 8. I'll fix it in the next 
> version after review..
>
> Or would a patch that removes completely all tabs from the file be 
> acceptable?

no. gratuitous space/tab changes are not accepted.

generally, for space/tab choice, the rule is to keep the options taken 
for the file to edit...

hard to tell on this file what's the choice made <g>

in this case, I'd say go for spaces only.

A+

[Saulius Krasuckas]

On 2022-02-19 22:59, Eric Pouech wrote:
> Le 19/02/2022 à 20:38, Roman Pišl a écrit :
> > unfortunately this code mixes tabs and spaces in a very ugly way - it 
> > indents by 4 but tab size is expected to be 8. I'll fix it in the next 
> > version after review..
> >
> > Or would a patch that removes completely all tabs from the file be 
> > acceptable?
> generally, for space/tab choice, the rule is to keep the options taken
> for the file to edit...
>
> hard to tell on this file what's the choice made <g>
>
> in this case, I'd say go for spaces only.

IIRC, fifteen years ago specifically that was the de-facto rule.  I 
guess it's still valid:
https://wiki.winehq.org/Wine_Developer%27s_Guide/Coding_Practice#Some_notes_....
> * Tabs are not forbidden but discouraged. A tab is defined as 8 
> characters and the usual amount of indentation is 4 characters.

S.