Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [jimtabor] 41250: - Hax-implement NtGdiSetPixelFormat and add a support function UserGethWnd with some code cleanup.

[Timo Kreuzer]

This looks like ultra-hax. Can you explain why this should be correct?
It would mean DrvSetPixelFormat would be passed a SURFACE rather than a
SURFOBJ.

jimtabor(a)svn.reactos.org schrieb:
>   Author: jimtabor
>  Date: Tue Jun  2 10:50:36 2009
>  New Revision: 41250
>
>  URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=41250&view=rev
>  Log:
>  - Hax-implement NtGdiSetPixelFormat and add a support function UserGethWnd with some code
> cleanup.
>
>  Modified:
>  [...]
>  +  /*
>  +     Based on some rules! InfoDC to DC or, based on wiki information!
>  +     All pointers, it's a "must be!", (CONTAINING_RECORD +10h = SURFOBJ),
> the
>  +     pointer will start at SURFOBJ of the SURFACE structure. 
>  +   */
>  +     pso = (SURFOBJ *)pdc->dclevel.pSurface;
>  +     if (!pso) pso = pdc->pSurfInfo;
>  +     if (!pso) pso = ppdev->pSurface;
>  +  }
>  +
>  +  if (ppdev->flFlags & PDEV_META_DEVICE)
>  +  {
>  +     UNIMPLEMENTED;
>  +     goto Exit;
>  +  }
>  +
>  +  if (ppdev->DriverFunctions.SetPixelFormat)
>  +  {
>  +     Ret = ppdev->DriverFunctions.SetPixelFormat(
>  +                                                pso,
>  +                                                ipfd,
>  +                                                hWnd);
>  +  }
>

[James Tabor]

Hi!

On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 6:55 AM, Timo Kreuzer <timo.kreuzer(a)web.de> wrote:
>   This looks like ultra-hax. Can you explain why this
> should be correct?
>  It would mean DrvSetPixelFormat would be passed a SURFACE rather than a
>  SURFOBJ.
>  
I updated the wiki about this. We Are doing it wrong if any of the
three pointers point at the BASEOBJECT of the handle structure and not
at "+0x10" SURFOBJ surfobj.....

pdc->dclevel.pSurface;
pdc->pSurfInfo;
ppdev->pSurface;

typedef struct _SURFACE
{                            // Win XP
    BASEOBJECT BaseObject;   // 0x000
    SURFOBJ    surfobj;      // 0x010 <---- above three pointers are set here!
    XDCOBJ *   pdcoAA;       // 0x044
    FLONG      flags;        // 0x048
......
......

Based on DC types one of the pointer is always zero and they toggle
between each other, ppdev->pSurface is always set.

>   jimtabor(a)svn.reactos.org schrieb:
> > Author: jimtabor
> > Date: Tue Jun  2 10:50:36 2009
> > New Revision: 41250
> >
> > URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=41250&view=rev
> > Log:
> > - Hax-implement NtGdiSetPixelFormat and add a support function UserGethWnd with some
> code cleanup.
> >
> > Modified:
> > [...]
> > +  /*
> > +     Based on some rules! InfoDC to DC or, based on wiki information!
> > +     All pointers, it's a "must be!", (CONTAINING_RECORD +10h =
> SURFOBJ), the
> > +     pointer will start at SURFOBJ of the SURFACE structure.
> > +   */ 
This is a hack, I'm not sure what to do if the other is zero~ My notes
are very spotty...

> >   +     pso =
> > (SURFOBJ *)pdc->dclevel.pSurface;
> >  +     if (!pso) pso = pdc->pSurfInfo;
> >  +     if (!pso) pso = ppdev->pSurface;
> >  +  }
> >  +
> >  +  if (ppdev->flFlags & PDEV_META_DEVICE)
> >  +  {
> >  +     UNIMPLEMENTED;
> >  +     goto Exit;
> >  +  }
> >  +
> >  +  if (ppdev->DriverFunctions.SetPixelFormat)
> >  +  {
> >  +     Ret = ppdev->DriverFunctions.SetPixelFormat(
> >  +                                                pso,
> >  +                                                ipfd,
> >  +                                                hWnd);
> >  +  }
> >  
>  
Thanks,
James

[Timo Kreuzer]

James Tabor wrote:
>   I updated the wiki about this. We Are doing it wrong
> if any of the
>  three pointers point at the BASEOBJECT of the handle structure and not
>  at "+0x10" SURFOBJ surfobj.....
>
>  pdc->dclevel.pSurface;
>  pdc->pSurfInfo;
>  ppdev->pSurface;
>
>  typedef struct _SURFACE
>  {                            // Win XP
>      BASEOBJECT BaseObject;   // 0x000
>      SURFOBJ    surfobj;      // 0x010 <---- above three pointers are set here!
>      XDCOBJ *   pdcoAA;       // 0x044
>      FLONG      flags;        // 0x048
>  ......
>  ......
>     
This is from XP:

[James Tabor]

Hi,
After spending some time searching my lab. Back in early 2007, I had a
note stating when the handle was in use it pointed to SURFOBJ and not
stored at SURFOBJ. Based on the pictures this is true. Sorry for
forgeting what I had written down.
James

2009/6/3 Timo Kreuzer <timo.kreuzer(a)web.de>de>:
>   James Tabor wrote:
>
>  I updated the wiki about this. We Are doing it wrong if any of the
>
>  three pointers point at the BASEOBJECT of the handle structure and not
>  at "+0x10" SURFOBJ surfobj.....
>  pdc->dclevel.pSurface;
>  pdc->pSurfInfo;
>  ppdev->pSurface;
>  typedef struct _SURFACE
>  {                            // Win XP
>      BASEOBJECT BaseObject;   // 0x000
>      SURFOBJ    surfobj;      // 0x010 <---- above three pointers are set
>  here!
>      XDCOBJ *   pdcoAA;       // 0x044
>      FLONG      flags;        // 0x048
>  ......
>  ......
>