On 10/5/21 11:20 AM, Matteo Bruni wrote:
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 1:49 PM Nikolay Sivov nsivov@codeweavers.com wrote:
Signed-off-by: Nikolay Sivov nsivov@codeweavers.com
dlls/d3d10/d3d10_private.h | 9 +++-- dlls/d3d10/effect.c | 74 +++++++++++++++++++------------------- dlls/d3d10/tests/effect.c | 28 +++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)
diff --git a/dlls/d3d10/d3d10_private.h b/dlls/d3d10/d3d10_private.h index 1ebbbd11ea3..216a5ae82a2 100644 --- a/dlls/d3d10/d3d10_private.h +++ b/dlls/d3d10/d3d10_private.h @@ -238,9 +238,12 @@ struct d3d10_effect_pass struct d3d10_effect_object *objects; struct d3d10_effect_variable *annotations;
- D3D10_PASS_SHADER_DESC vs;
- D3D10_PASS_SHADER_DESC ps;
- D3D10_PASS_SHADER_DESC gs;
- struct d3d10_effect_variable *vs;
- struct d3d10_effect_variable *ps;
- struct d3d10_effect_variable *gs;
- unsigned int vs_index;
- unsigned int ps_index;
- unsigned int gs_index; UINT stencil_ref; UINT sample_mask; float blend_factor[4];
I think It would be a bit nicer to introduce our own struct to store both the variable pointer and the index, mirroring D3D10_PASS_SHADER_DESC.
Sure, no harm in that, I'll resend 7/7 with next batch then. Thanks for the review.