[PATCH 2/5] user32: Use user_driver_funcs to expose user driver function from drivers.
Signed-off-by: Jacek Caban <jacek(a)codeweavers.com> --- The ultimate plan is for driver to register themselves by a direct Unix call to win32u. dlls/user32/driver.c | 154 +++++++++-------- dlls/user32/user32.spec | 1 + dlls/wineandroid.drv/android.h | 27 +++ dlls/wineandroid.drv/init.c | 132 ++++----------- dlls/wineandroid.drv/wineandroid.drv.spec | 24 --- dlls/winemac.drv/gdi.c | 148 ++++++----------- dlls/winemac.drv/macdrv.h | 52 ++++++ dlls/winemac.drv/mouse.c | 2 +- dlls/winemac.drv/winemac.drv.spec | 39 ----- dlls/winex11.drv/display.c | 1 - dlls/winex11.drv/event.c | 2 - dlls/winex11.drv/init.c | 194 +++++++++++----------- dlls/winex11.drv/winex11.drv.spec | 41 ----- dlls/winex11.drv/x11drv.h | 50 ++++++ dlls/winex11.drv/x11drv_main.c | 1 + dlls/winex11.drv/xim.c | 2 - include/wine/gdi_driver.h | 2 + 17 files changed, 393 insertions(+), 479 deletions(-)
Hi, While running your changed tests, I think I found new failures. Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be wrong, but could you please double-check? Full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=101532 Your paranoid android. === debiant2 (32 bit WoW report) === user32: input.c:1823: Test failed: expected non-zero input.c:1829: Test failed: expected -1, got 0 input.c:1830: Test failed: expected 122, got 0 input.c:1831: Test failed: expected non-zero input.c:1835: Test failed: expected non-zero input.c:1970: Test failed: expected non-zero === debiant2 (64 bit WoW report) === user32: input.c:1823: Test failed: expected non-zero input.c:1829: Test failed: expected -1, got 0 input.c:1830: Test failed: expected 122, got 0 input.c:1831: Test failed: expected non-zero input.c:1835: Test failed: expected non-zero input.c:1970: Test failed: expected non-zero
Hi Jacek, On 11/9/21 13:54, Jacek Caban wrote:
Signed-off-by: Jacek Caban <jacek(a)codeweavers.com> --- The ultimate plan is for driver to register themselves by a direct Unix call to win32u.
dlls/user32/driver.c | 154 +++++++++-------- dlls/user32/user32.spec | 1 + dlls/wineandroid.drv/android.h | 27 +++ dlls/wineandroid.drv/init.c | 132 ++++----------- dlls/wineandroid.drv/wineandroid.drv.spec | 24 --- dlls/winemac.drv/gdi.c | 148 ++++++----------- dlls/winemac.drv/macdrv.h | 52 ++++++ dlls/winemac.drv/mouse.c | 2 +- dlls/winemac.drv/winemac.drv.spec | 39 ----- dlls/winex11.drv/display.c | 1 - dlls/winex11.drv/event.c | 2 - dlls/winex11.drv/init.c | 194 +++++++++++----------- dlls/winex11.drv/winex11.drv.spec | 41 ----- dlls/winex11.drv/x11drv.h | 50 ++++++ dlls/winex11.drv/x11drv_main.c | 1 + dlls/winex11.drv/xim.c | 2 - include/wine/gdi_driver.h | 2 + 17 files changed, 393 insertions(+), 479 deletions(-)
I think this patch changes the behavior with "null" graphics driver: as it doesn't register itself, the newly added USER_Driver == &lazy_load_driver condition now always pass and it now registers nodrv_CreateWindow for visible winstation. Currently when "null" graphics driver is explicitly requested, it uses nulldrv_CreateWindow, which succeeds creating windows (invisible of course). I think it'd be nice to keep it, and the check could be added with the LoadLibraryW call instead. Cheers, -- Rémi Bernon <rbernon(a)codeweavers.com>
participants (3)
-
Jacek Caban -
Marvin -
Rémi Bernon