January 2016 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] shell32/tests: Trace the association properties for the DDE tests.
by Marvin Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

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 https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=19922 Your paranoid android. === wvistau64 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:1610: Test failed: WaitForSingleObject returned 258 shlexec.c:1639: Test failed: argvA3 expected 'QuotedLowerL', got 'Open' shlexec.c:1647: Test failed: argvA4 expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wtDA95.tmp\test file.shlexec', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wtDA95.tmp\test file.noassoc.shlexec' === w1064 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2356: Test failed: failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2356: Test failed: failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2356: Test failed: failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2356: Test failed: failed: rc=29 err=2 === w1064 (64 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2356: Test failed: failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2356: Test failed: failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2356: Test failed: failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2368: Test failed: ddeExec expected '[ifexec("C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt4F7B.tmp\test file.sde")]', got '[open("C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt4F7B.tmp\test file.sde")]' shlexec.c:2356: Test failed: failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2356: Test failed: failed: rc=29 err=2

2 1

Re: [PATCH] mscoree: Implement VTable fixup for x86_64 architecture.
by Vincent Povirk Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

I don't see anything obviously wrong here, but I also have no way of testing it, since we can't compile methods without loading the class library dll's. > +#elif __x86_64__ /* !defined(__i386__) */ Later in the patch it says defined(__x86_64__). I have no idea whether this distinction matters.

3 19

Re: [PATCH v2] mscoree: Implement VTable fixup for x86_64 architecture.
by Vincent Povirk Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

So, I'm trying to understand which registers we need to preserve, and I found some pages on MSDN. register usage: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/9z1stfyw.aspx parameter passing: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/zthk2dkh.aspx I think we need to preserve all parameter registers and can freely use any scratch registers that are not parameter registers, and that we only need to worry about the 64-bit Windows ABI. MSDN seems to say that only XMM0 through XMM3 are used for parameter passing, and that the extra bits in YMM0 through YMM3 are scratch registers. I think that means we can ignore XMM4, XMM5, and AVX extensions. The requirements may be different for the non-Windows ABI, but I hope we can trust the compiler to take care of that as long as we're not calling such a function directly. I'm not sure if we can use __attribute__((force_align_arg_pointer)) directly in this way, but I will defer to others on that question.

2 5

Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] shell32/tests: Call okShell() after a shell_execute{_ex}() test.
by Marvin Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

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 https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=19921 Your paranoid android. === wvistau64 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:1583: Test failed: WaitForSingleObject returned 258 shlexec.c:1612: Test failed: argvA3 expected 'QuotedLowerL', got 'Open' shlexec.c:1620: Test failed: argvA4 expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wtDD63.tmp\test file.shlexec', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wtDD63.tmp\test file.noassoc.shlexec' === w1064 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2329: Test failed: failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2329: Test failed: failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2329: Test failed: failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2329: Test failed: failed: rc=29 err=2 === w1064 (64 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2329: Test failed: failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2329: Test failed: failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2329: Test failed: failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2341: Test failed: ddeExec expected '[ifexec("C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt14C3.tmp\test file.sde")]', got '[open("C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt14C3.tmp\test file.sde")]' shlexec.c:2329: Test failed: failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2329: Test failed: failed: rc=29 err=2

1 0

Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] shell32/tests: Trace the last ShellExecute command whenever a corresponding test fails.
by Marvin Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

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 https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=19920 Your paranoid android. === w1064 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2336: Test failed: ShellExecuteEx(mask="0x8540", file="C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt39FF.tmp\test file.sde") failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2336: Test failed: ShellExecuteEx(mask="0x8540", file="C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt39FF.tmp\test file.sde") failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2336: Test failed: ShellExecuteEx(mask="0x8540", file="C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt39FF.tmp\test file.sde") failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2348: Test failed: ddeExec expected '[ifexec("C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt39FF.tmp\test file.sde")]', got '[open("C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt39FF.tmp\test file.sde")]' shlexec.c:2336: Test failed: ShellExecuteEx(mask="0x8540", file="C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt39FF.tmp\test file.sde") failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2336: Test failed: ShellExecuteEx(mask="0x8540", file="C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt39FF.tmp\test file.sde") failed: rc=29 err=2 === w1064 (64 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2336: Test failed: ShellExecuteEx(mask="0x8540", file="C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt29CA.tmp\test file.sde") failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2336: Test failed: ShellExecuteEx(mask="0x8540", file="C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt29CA.tmp\test file.sde") failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2336: Test failed: ShellExecuteEx(mask="0x8540", file="C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt29CA.tmp\test file.sde") failed: rc=29 err=2 shlexec.c:2336: Test failed: ShellExecuteEx(mask="0x8540", file="C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt29CA.tmp\test file.sde") failed: rc=29 err=2

1 0

Re: include: Create todo_wine_if.
by Sebastian Lackner Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

On 22.01.2016 17:50, Bernhard Übelacker wrote: > +#define todo_if(is_todo, platform) for (winetest_start_todo_if(is_todo, platform); \ > + winetest_loop_todo(); \ > + winetest_end_todo_if(is_todo, platform)) There is a high risk of corrupting todo_level if is_todo changes in the meantime. Nevertheless, I like the general idea of introducing such a command, it would make some tests much easier and avoid duplicated checks.

1 0

Re: [PATCH 2/2 v2] user32: Test error returned in out of timers case
by Marvin Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

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 https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=19916 Your paranoid android. === w1064 (32 bit msg) === msg.c:6290: Test failed: Update region shouldn't be empty msg.c:6524: Test failed: InvalidateErase: 0: the msg sequence is not complete: expected 0085 - actual 0000 msg.c:6526: Test failed: Paint: 0: the msg sequence is not complete: expected 000f - actual 0000 msg.c:6296: Test failed: Regions are different msg.c:6296: Test failed: Regions are different msg.c:6296: Test failed: Regions are different === w7pro64 (64 bit msg) === msg.c:15113: Test failed: wrong status 00400040

2 1

Re: shell32/tests: Fix a couple of okChildString()/okChildPath() mixups.
by Marvin Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

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 https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=19918 Your paranoid android. === build (build) === Patch failed to apply

1 0

Re: [PATCH 3/7] wined3d: Add support for WINED3DFMT_R8G8B8A8_UINT textures.
by Henri Verbeet Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

This introduces GL errors: err:d3d:check_fbo_compat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GL_INVALID_OPERATION (0x502) from Post-pixelshader blending check @ utils.c / 1905 err:d3d:check_fbo_compat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GL_INVALID_OPERATION (0x502) from Post-pixelshader blending check @ utils.c / 1905 err:d3d:check_fbo_compat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GL_INVALID_OPERATION (0x502) from Post-pixelshader blending check @ utils.c / 1905 err:d3d:check_fbo_compat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GL_INVALID_OPERATION (0x502) from Post-pixelshader blending check @ utils.c / 1905 err:d3d:check_fbo_compat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GL_INVALID_OPERATION (0x502) from Post-pixelshader blending check @ utils.c / 1905 err:d3d:check_fbo_compat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GL_INVALID_OPERATION (0x502) from Post-pixelshader blending check @ utils.c / 1905 I didn't check if that's the issue here, but in the longer term we'll probably need to add channel type information to the formats[] table. E.g. look at places that currently use WINED3DFMT_FLAG_FLOAT.

2 1

Re: [1/2] shell32/tests: Trace the last ShellExecute command whenever a corresponding test fails.
by Alexandre Julliard Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

Francois Gouget <fgouget(a)codeweavers.com> writes: > Signed-off-by: Francois Gouget <fgouget(a)codeweavers.com> > --- > dlls/shell32/tests/shlexec.c | 75 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- > 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/dlls/shell32/tests/shlexec.c b/dlls/shell32/tests/shlexec.c > index 8f03799..360fb2b 100644 > --- a/dlls/shell32/tests/shlexec.c > +++ b/dlls/shell32/tests/shlexec.c > @@ -94,6 +94,28 @@ static int _todo_wait = 0; > #define todo_wait for (_todo_wait = 1; _todo_wait; _todo_wait = 0) > > static char shell_call[2048]=""; > +static char last_shell_call[2048]=""; > +static void WINETEST_PRINTF_ATTR(2,3) _okShell(int condition, const char *msg, ...) > +{ > + va_list valist; > + > + /* Note: if winetest_debug > 1 the ShellExecute() command has already been > + * traced. > + */ > + if (winetest_debug <= 1 && !condition && strcmp(last_shell_call, shell_call)) > + { > + winetest_trace("Called %s\n", shell_call); > + strcpy(last_shell_call, shell_call); > + } > + > + va_start(valist, msg); > + winetest_vok(condition, msg, valist); > + va_end(valist); > +} Why is that better than always printing it in the failing calls? -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

2 5