- wine-gitlab - winehq.org

[PATCH 0/1] MR7109: Added missing functions _FCbuild, cimag, crealf and cimagf
by Stéphane Bacri (＠fr33z00) 19 Jan '25

19 Jan '25

This MR intends to add the complex numbers related functions: * cimag * _FCbuild * crealf * cimagf These functions are defined in dlls/msvcr120/math.c and mapped in dlls/msvcr120/msvcr120.spec and dlls/ucrbase/ucrbase.spec. The related tests were added in dlls/mscr120/tests/msvcr120.c and result were checked. -- https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/merge_requests/7109

4 3

[PATCH 0/1] MR7153: msvcrt: fixed potential syntax misprint
by Herman Semenov (＠GermanAizek) 19 Jan '25

19 Jan '25

Is this a mistake? are the brackets very strangely located, or was the condition accidentally deleted there? Maybe legacy code. -- https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/merge_requests/7153

4 3

Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] MR5830: dxgi: Fix some d3d12 swapchain issues.
by Giovanni Mascellani (＠giomasce) 17 Jan '25

17 Jan '25

On Fri Jun 21 06:04:13 2024 +0000, Conor McCarthy wrote: > I replaced this with a wait for the blit before returning from > `d3d12_swapchain_present()`. After a call to Present() returns, the > client can render to the next buffer in sequence, so we must wait for > completion of the blit read of that buffer. The old version using > `vkAcquireNextImageKHR()` is not strict enough. HZD with vsync has frame > pacing issues in some parts of the benchmark even on the old > implementation, and this makes it a little bit worse. We can't really > avoid that though, and the best fix is to improve frame times in vkd3d. Sorry it took so much time to react, but I don't think that's correct, at least not in general. I did some research on how maximum frame latency and `Present()` timing is supposed to work and this is what I could gather so far: * I'll assume that we're using a flip presentation model (the only one that is allowed for D3D12; the blt model is restricted to D3D11 and previous) and assume that `Present()` is always called with sync interval 1. * Partially repealing an earlier comment by me, it doesn't seem that `Present()` cares at all about `BufferCount`. The swapchain images are basically treated like a ring buffer of `BufferCount` elements. Each time `Present()` is called a presentation operation is queued; each time a presentation operation is dequeued (following the timing expressed by the sync interval), the next image is selected from the ring buffer (adding one to the read counter and wrapping it around) and presented. If you didn't synchronize correctly and write on an image before it is presented (or even while it is presented), bad for you, but the presentation engine doesn't care. You'll probably miss frames or have tearing. * So your only hope to not step on the presentation engine's feet is to make judicious use of frame latency commands. There the swapchain behaves differently depending of whether it was created with `DXGI_SWAP_CHAIN_FLAG_FRAME_LATENCY_WAITABLE_OBJECT` or not. * The legacy behavior is without `DXGI_SWAP_CHAIN_FLAG_FRAME_LATENCY_WAITABLE_OBJECT`. In this case the swapchain automatically manages the frame latency waits, so the application can just relay on `Present()` waiting appropriately. The maximum latency has to be set with `IDXGIDevice1::SetMaximumFrameLatency()`, but `IDXGIDevice` is not available for D3D12 devices, as far as I can tell; so we can only keep the default value, which is 3 in the docs (and that value aligns with my timing observations). In practice not having `DXGI_SWAP_CHAIN_FLAG_FRAME_LATENCY_WAITABLE_OBJECT` isn't a lot different than having it: the only difference is that at the end of each `Present()` call a wait on the latency waitable is done by D3D12 on behalf of the client (other minor differences is that you can't retrive the waitable itself or change the latency number). * Instead, if the swapchain is created with `DXGI_SWAP_CHAIN_FLAG_FRAME_LATENCY_WAITABLE_OBJECT` then some cooperation from the application is expected: the application has to retrieve the waitable object (which in practice behaves like a semaphore, even if the docs never seem to explicitly mention that). This is already tested in `test_frame_latency_event()`, even if the waitable is not an event: the semaphore starts at the default maximum latency (which is 1) and is released each time a frame is presented (for real, not when `Present()` is called). When `IDXGISwapChain2::SetMaximumFrameLatency()` and the new value is larger than the previous one, then the semaphore is released a number of times equal to the difference between the new and old value. If the new value is smaller, the semaphore is not touched (i.e., `SetMaximumFrameLatency()` never waits). The application is supposed to wait on the semaphore before starting rendering; if it doesn't, `Present()` will happily keep queuei ng presentation operations even if the ring buffer overflows and/or the set maximum latency is exceeded. I wrote an alternative implementation which should fix the same problem. It's in !7152 (it replaces only the last commit here, the first three make sense on their own). -- https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/merge_requests/5830#note_92165

1 0

Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] MR5830: dxgi: Fix some d3d12 swapchain issues.
by Giovanni Mascellani (＠giomasce) 17 Jan '25

17 Jan '25

On Fri Jun 21 06:04:13 2024 +0000, Conor McCarthy wrote: > I do see a small but measurable performance gain in HZD. It's only 0.7%, > but that shoud be weighed that against the very simple change needed to > gain it. That's indeed a lot for such a simple change. Good! -- https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/merge_requests/5830#note_92164

1 0

[PATCH 0/1] MR7151: server: Don't send WM_MOUSEMOVE for zero movement in queue_mouse_message().
by Paul Gofman (＠gofman) 17 Jan '25

17 Jan '25

-- https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/merge_requests/7151

3 4

[PATCH 0/5] MR7150: crypt32: Do not delete root certs which were not imported from host.
by Paul Gofman (＠gofman) 16 Jan '25

16 Jan '25

Currently the logic of syncing of certificates with host effectively assumes that all the root certificates come from host and doesn't mind the certificates added by the app (those erroneously get deleted during host sync). That fixes Battle.net being unable to complete game installs / update after Battle net update on 14 Jan 2025. This is not for code freeze obviously. The issue is that Battle.net fails to verify certificate chain which depends on an ephemeral certificate marked valid for DNS:localbattle.net (which resolves to 127.0.0.1) server auth. The certificate is self signed and is added to system root storage by Battle.bet setup (and also possibly later if it is missing). The addition of certificate to system root storage works per se, but then upon syncing host root certificates (in another process or new prefix start) the certificate gets wiped from registry. -- https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/merge_requests/7150

3 6

Re: [PATCH v3 0/1] MR7149: gdiplus: Check for MapFont result in generate_font_link_info. - approved
by Alexandre Julliard (＠julliard) 16 Jan '25

16 Jan '25

This merge request was approved by Alexandre Julliard. -- https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/merge_requests/7149

1 0

Re: [PATCH v3 0/0] MR7131: DIR command improvements: Make /o by itself behave equal to how it does in Windows
by eric pouech (＠epo) 16 Jan '25

16 Jan '25

from the top directory where you compiled Wine ./wine programs/winetest/x86_64-windows/winetest.exe -o - cmd.exe -- https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/merge_requests/7131#note_92048

1 0

Re: [PATCH v3 0/0] MR7131: DIR command improvements: Make /o by itself behave equal to how it does in Windows
by Joe Souza (＠JoeS209) 16 Jan '25

16 Jan '25

Thank you. I know nothing about running these tests. I just opened a command prompt via "wine cmd" and then just launched the test .cmd file. When I have some time I'll research how to run the tests, assuming that it's in the dev docs here somewhere. -- https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/merge_requests/7131#note_92045

1 0

Re: [PATCH v10 0/6] MR6569: winex11: Refactor window state/config tracker to fix race conditions.
by Patrick Laimbock (＠Patrick) 16 Jan '25

16 Jan '25

> I don't want to break something else this late. That makes total sense :smiley: I'm happy to test anything so feel free to ping me. -- https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/merge_requests/6569#note_92038

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

wine-gitlab