On 24 February 2014 23:54, Francois Gouget fgouget@codeweavers.com wrote:
This fixes some tests on the WineTestBot VM.
dlls/d3d9/tests/device.c | 18 +++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
Most of the IDirect3D9_CreateDevice() calls in device.c should be calls to create_device() instead. (And then just skip() if it fails to create a device.) I think the only exceptions are test_fpu_setup() and test_swvp_buffer().
On Tue, 25 Feb 2014, Henri Verbeet wrote:
On 24 February 2014 23:54, Francois Gouget fgouget@codeweavers.com wrote:
This fixes some tests on the WineTestBot VM.
dlls/d3d9/tests/device.c | 18 +++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
Most of the IDirect3D9_CreateDevice() calls in device.c should be calls to create_device() instead. (And then just skip() if it fails to create a device.) I think the only exceptions are test_fpu_setup() and test_swvp_buffer().
The remaining CreateDevice() calls seem to be using pretty different parameters.
For instance in test_mipmap_levels() it uses a different backbuffer format, does not set its size, sets EnableAutoDepthStencil to FALSE and passes D3DDEVTYPE_NULLREF. Will the test really still make sense if all that is changed?
Another example is test_depthstenciltest() which sets EnableAutoDepthStencil to FALSE but still sets AutoDepthStencilFormat. That's different from create_device() and intentionally so.
(test_reset() does so once too without a comment which looks more questionable)
The problem is there's about 20 remaining CreateDevice() calls and I would be hard pressed to tell if they are crucially different from what create_device() does.
On 27 February 2014 03:27, Francois Gouget fgouget@codeweavers.com wrote:
The remaining CreateDevice() calls seem to be using pretty different parameters.
For instance in test_mipmap_levels() it uses a different backbuffer format, does not set its size, sets EnableAutoDepthStencil to FALSE and passes D3DDEVTYPE_NULLREF. Will the test really still make sense if all that is changed?
Yeah.
Another example is test_depthstenciltest() which sets EnableAutoDepthStencil to FALSE but still sets AutoDepthStencilFormat. That's different from create_device() and intentionally so.
(test_reset() does so once too without a comment which looks more questionable)
Yeah, both of those intentionally don't set EnableAutoDepthStencil.
The problem is there's about 20 remaining CreateDevice() calls and I would be hard pressed to tell if they are crucially different from what create_device() does.
Ok, I'll look into it a bit.
-
Francois Gouget -
Henri Verbeet