Re: BUG (3920) + sync between DIBs and X Server optimisation. (please help)

[Marinescu-Ghetau Iulian]

Yeah, i also belive putting the modifying rect in Coerce is better, when i 
first made the changes i just wanted to modify as little as possible and add 
things without modifying the already existing code too much, keeping it 
clean. I also belive i am doing something wrong:

I noticed that in X11DRV_DIB_CopyDIBSection() function created to optimise 
bitblt(), the sync is done this way:

X11DRV_DIB_DoCopyDIBSection(physBitmap, FALSE, colorMap, nColorMap,
    			physDevDst->drawable, xSrc, ySrc,
                                physDevDst->org.x + xDest, physDevDst->org.y 
+ yDest,
    			width, height);

They take in consideration the (org.x,org.y) in the physical device! I don't 
understand too well what  a physical devise exactly is, and i was wondering 
if i am not mistaking when i sync like this in 
X11DRV_DIB_DoUpdateDIBSection():

X11DRV_DIB_DoCopyDIBSection(physBitmap, toDIB,
                                physBitmap->colorMap, physBitmap->nColorMap,
                                physBitmap->pixmap, x, y, x, y,
                                width, height);

and not taking in consideration the origins of the device?

Iulian
> From: Robert Shearman 
> To: Marinescu-Ghetau Iulian 
> CC: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: BUG (3920) + sync between DIBs and X Server optimisation. 
> (please help)
> Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 11:07:20 -0600
>
> Marinescu-Ghetau Iulian wrote:
> > I came to the conclusion that the slowness in "Heroes IV" it has to do 
> > with
> > sync'ing lage bitmaps between application DIBs and X Server(see the log: 
> > http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=1470&action=view ).
> >
> > Also, a complete description of the bug is here: 
> > http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3902
> >
> > So i had this ideea that every GDI function could memorise the rectangle 
> > that is modifying, so each time a sync between DIB and X Server is needed, 
> > only a small part from the bitmap will get copied! I also made some 
> > changes to dib.c, bitblt.c and x11drv.h in "wine-0.9.2\dlls\x11drv" folder 
> > to implement my ideea, keeping backwards compatibility (if a DIB function 
> > doesn't set a valid rectangle for the bitmap that its modifying, the 
> > default values are taken - which is the entire bitmap)
> > -
> >
> > and finally, a GDI function calls it like this (for example bitblt):
> >
> > X11DRV_SetBoundRect(physDevDst->bitmap,xDst,yDst,width,height);
> >  X11DRV_CoerceDIBSection( physDevDst, DIB_Status_GdiMod, FALSE );
> >  if (physDevDst != physDevSrc)
> >  {
> >    X11DRV_SetBoundRect(physDevSrc->bitmap,xSrc,ySrc,width,height);
> >    X11DRV_CoerceDIBSection( physDevSrc, DIB_Status_GdiMod, FALSE );
> >  }
>
> I think it would be better to make X11DRV_CoerceDIBSection take the 
> parameters for a bounding rect, otherwise it is possible to forget a call 
> to SetBoundRect and cause the DIB to not be updated.
>
> --
> Rob Shearman