August 2010 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Wine users with a CD-ROM drive, please test
by Joerg-Cyril.Hoehle＠t-systems.com Aug. 11, 2010

Aug. 11, 2010

Hi, No more MCIERR_HARDWARE in David's latest test result, hurray! The difference with prior tests is that I temporarily eliminated 3 commands a) resume c b) set c video audio all off c) set c door closed notify We are not done yet. Users who saw that error please feed the following scripts into the mcishell to see which of those 3 commands causes the failure. The mcishell is attached to bug #20232 at http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20232#c10 http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=24529 wintest.exe mcishell mci.c:1363: Type your commands to the MCI, end with Ctrl-Z The 5 test failures in David's report are unrelated to MCIERR_HARDWARE. >mcicda.c:540: Test failed: status mode after play is playing Weird. I'd have expected Play to terminate within Sleep(3900ms) time. >mcicda.c:297: Test failed: status position initially 00:02:33 I'll take care of that another day. For now I'll just remember that there are disks that don't start at position 00:02:00. Please copy&paste these lines as one piece into a cmd shell so that there's as little delay as possible between commands. # a) resume open cdaudio alias c notify shareable status c mode status c position play c from 00:02:00 to 00:01:00 notify resume c status c mode seek c to start notify status c mode seek c to end # # testsuite uses seek c to MM:SS:FF instead set c time format tmsf play c from 1 stop c Don't forget after each one close c # b) set video audio open cdaudio alias c notify shareable status c mode status c position play c from 00:02:00 to 00:01:00 notify seek c to start notify set c video audio all off status c mode seek c to end # # testsuite uses seek c to MM:SS:FF instead set c time format tmsf play c from 1 stop c # c) set door closed open cdaudio alias c notify shareable status c mode status c position play c from 00:02:00 to 00:01:00 notify seek c to start notify set c door closed notify status c mode seek c to end # # testsuite uses seek c to MM:SS:FF instead set c time format tmsf play c from 1 stop c Thank you for testing, Jörg Höhle

1 0

Request for comments - d3dx9: Add tests for FVF <-> declaration conversion.
by misha680 Aug. 10, 2010

Aug. 10, 2010

Dear All: I have become more busy with schoolwork than I had imagined. However, I would still like, if possible, to finish work on http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22918 It has been suggested that I send patches to the wine-devel list first for feedback. This way, I hope to be able to get developer expertise in these areas, and to be able to understand exactly what is necessary for a given patch. I have, per this comment from Henri: http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22918#c51 written a draft patch for FVF <-> declaration conversion tests. It can be found at the Nabble link below. I will appreciate comments as to what is necessary for this patch (or a similar one) to get accepted. http://wine.1045685.n5.nabble.com/file/n2471306/0001-d3dx9-Add-tests-for-FV… 0001-d3dx9-Add-tests-for-FVF-declaration-conversion.txt I realize there are already three tests for conversion in one direction. I have decided at the moment to leave those as is and focus on getting necessary feedback for getting an appropriate patch accepted. If you have any guidance with regards to this, much appreciated. Thank you Misha p.s. I have uploaded some shell scripts that I use for Wine development here: http://groups.google.com/group/misha680-wine/files I don't know how useful they will be to anyone else, but if anything, it provides an nice backup for my computer. -- View this message in context: http://wine.1045685.n5.nabble.com/Request-for-comments-d3dx9-Add-tests-for-… Sent from the Wine - Devel mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

2 2

Re: [PATCH 1/5] ddraw/tests: Add test for bad size of surface caps in CreateSurface. (try 5)
by Stefan Dösinger Aug. 10, 2010

Aug. 10, 2010

Diff -u doesn't find any difference between try 4 and try 5, and probably older tries. If you're resending them because the older ones weren't applied, that's futile - Alexandre is on vacation. Also it is generally a bad idea to keep resending a unchanged patch. If you think the patch has been lost(e.g. Alexandre is waiting for my review and I am not at home, etc) it is better to ask on Wine-devel what is up with the patches. Am Sonntag 08 August 2010, 07:09:24 schrieb Oldřich Jedlička: > --- > dlls/ddraw/tests/dsurface.c | 138 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 138 > insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/dlls/ddraw/tests/dsurface.c b/dlls/ddraw/tests/dsurface.c > index 76bfc7e..8cdcd92 100644 > --- a/dlls/ddraw/tests/dsurface.c > +++ b/dlls/ddraw/tests/dsurface.c > @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ > > #include <assert.h> > #include "wine/test.h" > +#include "wine/exception.h" > #include "ddraw.h" > #include "d3d.h" > #include "unknwn.h" > @@ -3569,6 +3570,142 @@ static void BackBufferAttachmentFlipTest(void) > DestroyWindow(window); > } > > +static void CreateSurfaceBadCapsSizeTest(void) > +{ > + DDSURFACEDESC ddsd_ok; > + DDSURFACEDESC ddsd_bad1; > + DDSURFACEDESC ddsd_bad2; > + DDSURFACEDESC ddsd_bad3; > + DDSURFACEDESC ddsd_bad4; > + DDSURFACEDESC2 ddsd2_ok; > + DDSURFACEDESC2 ddsd2_bad1; > + DDSURFACEDESC2 ddsd2_bad2; > + DDSURFACEDESC2 ddsd2_bad3; > + DDSURFACEDESC2 ddsd2_bad4; > + IDirectDrawSurface *surf; > + IDirectDrawSurface4 *surf4; > + IDirectDrawSurface7 *surf7; > + HRESULT hr; > + IDirectDraw2 *dd2; > + IDirectDraw4 *dd4; > + IDirectDraw7 *dd7; > + > + const DWORD caps = DDSCAPS_OFFSCREENPLAIN; > + > + memset(&ddsd_ok, 0, sizeof(ddsd_ok)); > + ddsd_ok.dwSize = sizeof(ddsd_ok); > + ddsd_ok.dwFlags = DDSD_CAPS | DDSD_WIDTH | DDSD_HEIGHT; > + ddsd_ok.dwWidth = 64; > + ddsd_ok.dwHeight = 64; > + ddsd_ok.ddsCaps.dwCaps = caps; > + memcpy(&ddsd_bad1, &ddsd_ok, sizeof(ddsd_bad1)); > + ddsd_bad1.dwSize--; > + memcpy(&ddsd_bad2, &ddsd_ok, sizeof(ddsd_bad2)); > + ddsd_bad2.dwSize++; > + memcpy(&ddsd_bad3, &ddsd_ok, sizeof(ddsd_bad3)); > + ddsd_bad3.dwSize = 0; > + memcpy(&ddsd_bad4, &ddsd_ok, sizeof(ddsd_bad4)); > + ddsd_bad4.dwSize = sizeof(DDSURFACEDESC2); > + > + memset(&ddsd2_ok, 0, sizeof(ddsd2_ok)); > + ddsd2_ok.dwSize = sizeof(ddsd2_ok); > + ddsd2_ok.dwFlags = DDSD_CAPS | DDSD_WIDTH | DDSD_HEIGHT; > + ddsd2_ok.dwWidth = 64; > + ddsd2_ok.dwHeight = 64; > + ddsd2_ok.ddsCaps.dwCaps = caps; > + memcpy(&ddsd2_bad1, &ddsd2_ok, sizeof(ddsd2_bad1)); > + ddsd2_bad1.dwSize--; > + memcpy(&ddsd2_bad2, &ddsd2_ok, sizeof(ddsd2_bad2)); > + ddsd2_bad2.dwSize++; > + memcpy(&ddsd2_bad3, &ddsd2_ok, sizeof(ddsd2_bad3)); > + ddsd2_bad3.dwSize = 0; > + memcpy(&ddsd2_bad4, &ddsd2_ok, sizeof(ddsd2_bad4)); > + ddsd2_bad4.dwSize = sizeof(DDSURFACEDESC); > + > + hr = IDirectDraw_CreateSurface(lpDD, &ddsd_ok, &surf, NULL); > + ok(SUCCEEDED(hr), "IDirectDraw_CreateSurface failed: 0x%08x\n", hr); > + IDirectDrawSurface_Release(surf); > + > + hr = IDirectDraw_CreateSurface(lpDD, &ddsd_bad1, &surf, NULL); > + todo_wine ok(hr == DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, "IDirectDraw_CreateSurface > didn't return 0x%08x, but 0x%08x\n", + DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, hr); > + hr = IDirectDraw_CreateSurface(lpDD, &ddsd_bad2, &surf, NULL); > + todo_wine ok(hr == DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, "IDirectDraw_CreateSurface > didn't return 0x%08x, but 0x%08x\n", + DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, hr); > + hr = IDirectDraw_CreateSurface(lpDD, &ddsd_bad3, &surf, NULL); > + ok(hr == DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, "IDirectDraw_CreateSurface didn't return > 0x%08x, but 0x%08x\n", + DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, hr); > + hr = IDirectDraw_CreateSurface(lpDD, &ddsd_bad4, &surf, NULL); > + todo_wine ok(hr == DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, "IDirectDraw_CreateSurface > didn't return 0x%08x, but 0x%08x\n", + DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, hr); > + > + hr = IDirectDraw_QueryInterface(lpDD, &IID_IDirectDraw2, (void **) > &dd2); + ok(SUCCEEDED(hr), "IDirectDraw_QueryInterface failed: > 0x%08x\n", hr); + > + hr = IDirectDraw2_CreateSurface(dd2, &ddsd_ok, &surf, NULL); > + ok(SUCCEEDED(hr), "IDirectDraw2_CreateSurface failed: 0x%08x\n", hr); > + IDirectDrawSurface_Release(surf); > + > + hr = IDirectDraw2_CreateSurface(dd2, &ddsd_bad1, &surf, NULL); > + todo_wine ok(hr == DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, "IDirectDraw2_CreateSurface > didn't return 0x%08x, but 0x%08x\n", + DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, hr); > + hr = IDirectDraw2_CreateSurface(dd2, &ddsd_bad2, &surf, NULL); > + todo_wine ok(hr == DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, "IDirectDraw2_CreateSurface > didn't return 0x%08x, but 0x%08x\n", + DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, hr); > + hr = IDirectDraw2_CreateSurface(dd2, &ddsd_bad3, &surf, NULL); > + ok(hr == DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, "IDirectDraw2_CreateSurface didn't > return 0x%08x, but 0x%08x\n", + DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, hr); > + hr = IDirectDraw2_CreateSurface(dd2, &ddsd_bad4, &surf, NULL); > + todo_wine ok(hr == DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, "IDirectDraw2_CreateSurface > didn't return 0x%08x, but 0x%08x\n", + DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, hr); > + > + IDirectDraw2_Release(dd2); > + > + hr = IDirectDraw_QueryInterface(lpDD, &IID_IDirectDraw4, (void **) > &dd4); + ok(SUCCEEDED(hr), "IDirectDraw_QueryInterface failed: > 0x%08x\n", hr); + > + hr = IDirectDraw4_CreateSurface(dd4, &ddsd2_ok, &surf4, NULL); > + ok(SUCCEEDED(hr), "IDirectDraw4_CreateSurface failed: 0x%08x\n", hr); > + IDirectDrawSurface4_Release(surf4); > + > + hr = IDirectDraw4_CreateSurface(dd4, &ddsd2_bad1, &surf4, NULL); > + todo_wine ok(hr == DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, "IDirectDraw4_CreateSurface > didn't return 0x%08x, but 0x%08x\n", + DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, hr); > + hr = IDirectDraw4_CreateSurface(dd4, &ddsd2_bad2, &surf4, NULL); > + todo_wine ok(hr == DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, "IDirectDraw4_CreateSurface > didn't return 0x%08x, but 0x%08x\n", + DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, hr); > + hr = IDirectDraw4_CreateSurface(dd4, &ddsd2_bad3, &surf4, NULL); > + ok(hr == DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, "IDirectDraw4_CreateSurface didn't > return 0x%08x, but 0x%08x\n", + DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, hr); > + hr = IDirectDraw4_CreateSurface(dd4, &ddsd2_bad4, &surf4, NULL); > + todo_wine ok(hr == DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, "IDirectDraw4_CreateSurface > didn't return 0x%08x, but 0x%08x\n", + DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, hr); > + > + IDirectDraw4_Release(dd4); > + > + hr = IDirectDraw_QueryInterface(lpDD, &IID_IDirectDraw7, (void **) > &dd7); + ok(SUCCEEDED(hr), "IDirectDraw_QueryInterface failed: > 0x%08x\n", hr); + > + hr = IDirectDraw7_CreateSurface(dd7, &ddsd2_ok, &surf7, NULL); > + ok(SUCCEEDED(hr), "IDirectDraw7_CreateSurface failed: 0x%08x\n", hr); > + IDirectDrawSurface7_Release(surf7); > + > + hr = IDirectDraw7_CreateSurface(dd7, &ddsd2_bad1, &surf7, NULL); > + todo_wine ok(hr == DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, "IDirectDraw7_CreateSurface > didn't return 0x%08x, but 0x%08x\n", + DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, hr); > + hr = IDirectDraw7_CreateSurface(dd7, &ddsd2_bad2, &surf7, NULL); > + todo_wine ok(hr == DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, "IDirectDraw7_CreateSurface > didn't return 0x%08x, but 0x%08x\n", + DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, hr); > + hr = IDirectDraw7_CreateSurface(dd7, &ddsd2_bad3, &surf7, NULL); > + ok(hr == DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, "IDirectDraw7_CreateSurface didn't > return 0x%08x, but 0x%08x\n", + DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, hr); > + hr = IDirectDraw7_CreateSurface(dd7, &ddsd2_bad4, &surf7, NULL); > + todo_wine ok(hr == DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, "IDirectDraw7_CreateSurface > didn't return 0x%08x, but 0x%08x\n", + DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, hr); > + > + IDirectDraw7_Release(dd7); > +} > + > START_TEST(dsurface) > { > HRESULT ret; > @@ -3624,5 +3761,6 @@ START_TEST(dsurface) > GetDCFormatTest(); > BackBufferCreateSurfaceTest(); > BackBufferAttachmentFlipTest(); > + CreateSurfaceBadCapsSizeTest(); > ReleaseDirectDraw(); > }

2 2

X Presentation and Synchronization - will it help Wine performance
by Groeschel, Volker Aug. 10, 2010

Aug. 10, 2010

Hi, I wonder if Wine will profit from the new X Presentation and Synchronization feature NVIDIA is working on: http://people.freedesktop.org/~aplattner/x-presentation-and-synchronization… According to the Phoronix article the feature is planed for X.Org Server 1.10: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=ODM3Ng e.g. when I start several instances of my game with Wine on my computer (AMD X2 with Ubuntu and proprietary NVIDIA graphic drivers), performance breaks down dramatically. As of three instances the third windows freezes or gets near 0 FPS while the same computer with Win XP can run up to eight instances. Many thanks for your good work which helps me to get rid of Windows in my home office ☺

3 2

New and subtle ddraw:dsurface test failure
by wylda＠volny.cz Aug. 10, 2010

Aug. 10, 2010

Hi, i just noticed some new and subtle failure in ddraw:dsurface tests. I don't know how closely you watch and study tests results, so i thought it might be a good idea bring it the the light. Sorry if not ;-) Compared WinXP 277040d92454 vs 8b2a403a7dc3 (latest vs last Friday). Interestingly does not happen on Intel and nVidia 64bit. So the only affected is nVidia 32bit. (For my education) Generally, when the test fails in Windows world, it means that the test is wrongly written or not supported under the tested Windows version? (not blaming anyone, just asking how things work;) And the last question is about MSI failures and timeouts which some boxes suffers... In my case the "powerful" succeeds and the "weak" timeouts here (and not just mine). Shouldn't be the timeout prolonged? Regards, W. PS: I probably missed "gratulation time" for v1.2, so at least i wish all the goodness to 1.3.xx line! And hope i find another free time for buzilla soon.

5 6

Re: winex11.drv: Fix uninitialised values. (valgrind) (try 2)
by Michael Stefaniuc Aug. 10, 2010

Aug. 10, 2010

Hello Austin, Austin Lund wrote: > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > From 07bc18edc35c68c8e0da58a70ccd5c8f03584a1a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Austin Lund <austin.lund(a)gmail.com> > Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 13:03:14 +1000 > Subject: [PATCH] winex11.drv: Fix uninitialised values. (valgrind) > > --- > dlls/winex11.drv/bitmap.c | 2 +- > dlls/winex11.drv/dib.c | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/dlls/winex11.drv/bitmap.c b/dlls/winex11.drv/bitmap.c > index 4683fd9..af6c00b 100644 > --- a/dlls/winex11.drv/bitmap.c > +++ b/dlls/winex11.drv/bitmap.c > @@ -351,7 +351,7 @@ LONG CDECL X11DRV_SetBitmapBits( HBITMAP hbitmap, const void *bits, LONG count ) > wine_tsx11_lock(); > image = XCreateImage( gdi_display, visual, physBitmap->pixmap_depth, ZPixmap, 0, NULL, > bitmap.bmWidth, height, 32, 0 ); > - if (!(image->data = HeapAlloc( GetProcessHeap(), 0, image->bytes_per_line * height ))) > + if (!(image->data = HeapAlloc( GetProcessHeap(), HEAP_ZERO_MEMORY, image->bytes_per_line * height ))) > { > WARN("No memory to create image data.\n"); > XDestroyImage( image ); > diff --git a/dlls/winex11.drv/dib.c b/dlls/winex11.drv/dib.c > index 11157f1..eda064e 100644 > --- a/dlls/winex11.drv/dib.c > +++ b/dlls/winex11.drv/dib.c > @@ -3535,7 +3535,7 @@ static int X11DRV_DIB_SetImageBits( const X11DRV_DIB_IMAGEBITS_DESCR *descr ) > else { > bmpImage = XCreateImage( gdi_display, visual, descr->depth, ZPixmap, 0, NULL, > descr->infoWidth, lines, 32, 0 ); > - bmpImage->data = HeapAlloc( GetProcessHeap(), 0, lines * bmpImage->bytes_per_line ); > + bmpImage->data = HeapAlloc( GetProcessHeap(), HEAP_ZERO_MEMORY, lines * bmpImage->bytes_per_line ); > if(bmpImage->data == NULL) { > ERR("Out of memory!\n"); > XDestroyImage( bmpImage ); > both functions are heavily used and you don't want to waste time HEAP_ZERO_MEMORY just to please valgrind. I even wonder why valgrind complains as e.g. in X11DRV_SetBitmapBits() only the default switch case won't initialize the memory at all. bye michael

2 2

Re: [PATCH] quartz: implement AsyncReader_FindPin
by David Adam Aug. 9, 2010

Aug. 9, 2010

Hi, what about if ppPin is NULL? I think that this patch needs test cases to prove that it is correct? David 2010/8/6 Anton Khirnov <wyskas(a)gmail.com> > --- > dlls/quartz/filesource.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > 1 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/dlls/quartz/filesource.c b/dlls/quartz/filesource.c > index 110415d..00a91c8 100644 > --- a/dlls/quartz/filesource.c > +++ b/dlls/quartz/filesource.c > @@ -548,9 +548,37 @@ static HRESULT WINAPI AsyncReader_EnumPins(IBaseFilter > * iface, IEnumPins **ppEn > > static HRESULT WINAPI AsyncReader_FindPin(IBaseFilter * iface, LPCWSTR Id, > IPin **ppPin) > { > - FIXME("(%s, %p)\n", debugstr_w(Id), ppPin); > + IEnumPins *enumpins; > + HRESULT hr; > > - return E_NOTIMPL; > + hr = AsyncReader_EnumPins(iface, &enumpins); > + if (FAILED(hr)) > + return S_FALSE; > + > + while (hr == S_OK) { > + IPin *pin; > + LPWSTR pinname; > + > + hr = IEnumPins_Next(enumpins, 1, &pin, NULL); > + if (FAILED(hr)) > + break; > + > + hr = IPin_QueryId(pin, &pinname); > + if (SUCCEEDED(hr)) { > + if (!strcmpW(pinname, Id)) { > + *ppPin = pin; > + IPin_AddRef(*ppPin); > + CoTaskMemFree(pinname); > + break; > + } > + CoTaskMemFree(pinname); > + } > + } > + > + IEnumPins_Release(enumpins); > + if (SUCCEEDED(hr)) > + return S_OK; > + return S_FALSE; > } > > static HRESULT WINAPI AsyncReader_QueryFilterInfo(IBaseFilter * iface, > FILTER_INFO *pInfo) > -- > 1.7.1 > > > >

2 1

'winetricks python' and user-submitted small testcases
by Dan Kegel Aug. 8, 2010

Aug. 8, 2010

Waaaay back in 2002, the wine project experimented with writing win32 conformance tests in Perl. Nobody liked it; it was dropped in favor of conformance tests in C, and there was much rejoicing. Today I noticed http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23940 which has a simple win32 test case written in Python. Surprisingly, with 'winetricks python', the test case ran and demonstrated the problem (though since the python script expected you to start another app first, and edit the python to have the other app's window title, it wasn't an unattended test). That particular bug isn't anything special, but I was happy to see that a user who preferred Python was able to successfully send a minimal test case for a win32 problem written in his favorite language, and have someone else successfully run it.

1 0

Re: [PATCH 5/5] ddraw: Allow creating back buffer for DirectX 1 interfaces. (try 5)
by testbot＠testbot.winehq.org Aug. 8, 2010

Aug. 8, 2010

Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, 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 http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=4356 Your paranoid android. === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit visual) === visual.c:1742: Test failed: Got color 000a246a, expected 00000000 visual.c:1748: Test failed: Got color 006b8bbd, expected 00ff0000 or near visual.c:1751: Test failed: Got color 00ffffff, expected 00000000 visual.c:1757: Test failed: Got color 00ffffff, expected 00800000 or near === W98SE (32 bit dsurface) === No test summary line found

1 0

Re: gdi32: use usp10 to optionally generate glyphs for bidi strings
by Dmitry Timoshkov Aug. 8, 2010

Aug. 8, 2010

Aric Stewart <aric(a)codeweavers.com> wrote: > allows us to be able to make use of the mirroring code and eventually > the shaping code when it is in place. This should be done the other way around. gdi32 should not depend on a high level dll (that creates circular dependencies), gdi32 in Windows doesn't use usp10 either. -- Dmitry.

4 5