On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 at 16:10, Jan Sikorski jsikorski@codeweavers.com wrote:
On 20 Apr 2021, at 15:30, Henri Verbeet hverbeet@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 at 11:37, Jan Sikorski jsikorski@codeweavers.com wrote:
@@ -921,6 +921,9 @@ void wined3d_context_vk_destroy_bo(struct wined3d_context_vk *context_vk, const if (bo->map_ptr) VK_CALL(vkUnmapMemory(device_vk->vk_device, bo->vk_memory)); wined3d_context_vk_destroy_vk_memory(context_vk, bo->vk_memory, bo->command_buffer_id);
- if (bo->command_buffer_id == context_vk->current_command_buffer.id)
context_vk->retired_bo_counter += bo->size;}
Should we guard "retired_bo_counter" against overflow? On 32-bit builds that has a maximum of 4GiB, which is perhaps not as much as it once was in terms of VRAM.
Right, that wouldn’t hurt even if it’s not that likely to happen, would you mind if I simply changed it to VkDeviceSize instead of doing overflow checks?
I think that's fine too.