Patchwatcher notes that the conformance test fails here:
../../../tools/runtest -q -P wine -M d3dx8.dll -T ../../.. -p d3dx8_test.exe.so math.c && touch math.ok math.c:442: Test failed: Expected matrix= (-0.214800,1.311600,0.475200,0.000000 0.950400,-0.883600,0.924400,0.000000 1.021200,0.193600,-1.358800,0.000000 18.298500,-29.624001,15.683499,1.000000 )
Got matrix= (-0.214800,1.311600,0.475200,0.000000 0.950401,-0.883601,0.924400,0.000000 1.021204,0.193593,-1.358803,0.000000 18.298538,-29.624159,15.683425,1.000000)
Looks like rounding errors, but one way or another, you have to take care of that.
Also: did you benchmark this change to verify it actually made things faster? Unrolling loops is no longer as sure-fire a win as it used to be. I'm inclined to prefer the more compact, clear loop unless there's hard evidence it's > 1% slower. - Dan
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: patchwatcher@kegel.com Date: Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 8:35 PM Subject: Patchwatcher: failed regression tests: d3dx8: replace loops with explicit computations to make them faster [PATCH] d3dx8: replace loops by explicit computations To: dank@kegel.com
Hi! This is the experimental automated wine patchwatcher thingy. The latest git sources were built and tested with your patch "d3dx8: replace loops with explicit computations to make them faster [PATCH] d3dx8: replace loops by explicit computations" Result: the patch failed regression tests.
You can retrieve the full build results at http://kegel.com/wine/patchwatcher/results/264.log and see the patch as parsed at http://kegel.com/wine/patchwatcher/results/264.txt See http://kegel.com/wine/patchwatcher/results for more info.