Re: [hatari-devel] --force-max not working in 2.0.0

[Thomas Huth <th.huth@xxxxxx>]

On 18.12.2016 23:15, Eero Tamminen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Thomas, any news on this?  It has been working
> fine for me.

I did some quick-n-very-dirty performance measurements with "top", and
it seems to me that 32-bit rendering is some percents slower here.
So I think a good solution would be:

- If nForceBpp is set, use that value

- If nForceBpp is zero, use 16 bpp unless screen recording is enabled

I'll try that out sometime after X-Mas, but this week, I do not have
time for this.

 Thomas


> 
>     - Eero
> 
> On 11/30/2016 09:02 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> On 30.11.2016 00:05, Eero Tamminen wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 11/29/2016 11:49 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>>> Am Tue, 29 Nov 2016 18:55:57 +0100 (CET)
>>>> schrieb Anders Eriksson <ae@xxxxxx>:
>>>>> There is a bug in all versions of Hatari I've tried; if you record a
>>>>> Falcon video, and it change the screen size, the recording will abort
>>>>> if you are using 32-bit rendering. Only with 16-bit the recording
>>>>> will continue. Yes this is with --force-max.
>>>>
>>>> I think this happens because we're rendering Falcon hi-color mode
>>>> always with 16 bpp by default, while the indexed resolutions are
>>>> rendered into 32 bpp. So if a demo switches between hi-color and
>>>> indexed mode, the recording has to be stopped because the bpp of the
>>>> host screen changed.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe we should rather always use 32 bpp nowadays, e.g. with a patch
>>>> like this:
>>>>
>>>> diff -r df34f122c82a src/falcon/videl.c
>>>> --- a/src/falcon/videl.c    Mon Nov 28 11:01:05 2016 +0100
>>>> +++ b/src/falcon/videl.c    Tue Nov 29 22:44:59 2016 +0100
>>>> @@ -863,10 +863,8 @@
>>>>  /* User selected another zoom mode, so set a new screen resolution
>>>> now */
>>>>  void VIDEL_ZoomModeChanged(bool bForceChange)
>>>>  {
>>>> -    int bpp = videl.save_scrBpp == 16 ? 16 :
>>>> ConfigureParams.Screen.nForceBpp;
>>>> -
>>>>      Screen_SetGenConvSize(videl.save_scrWidth, videl.save_scrHeight,
>>>> -                          bpp, bForceChange);
>>>> +                          ConfigureParams.Screen.nForceBpp,
>>>> bForceChange);
>>>>  }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> @@ -903,7 +901,7 @@
>>>>      }
>>>>      if (change) {
>>>>          LOG_TRACE(TRACE_VIDEL, "Videl : video mode change to
>>>> %dx%d@%d\n", videl.save_scrWidth, videl.save_scrHeight,
>>>> videl.save_scrBpp);
>>>> -        Screen_SetGenConvSize(videl.save_scrWidth,
>>>> videl.save_scrHeight, videl.save_scrBpp == 16 ? 16 :
>>>> ConfigureParams.Screen.nForceBpp, false);
>>>> +        Screen_SetGenConvSize(videl.save_scrWidth,
>>>> videl.save_scrHeight, ConfigureParams.Screen.nForceBpp, false);
>>>>      }
>>>>
>>>>      if (vw < 32 || vh < 32) {
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ... but this needs a bit of testing before I dare to commit it, to see
>>>> whether it has performance impacts or other problems...
>>>
>>> Hm, isn't it rather allowing user to force
>>> the bitdepth (which is preferable), instead
>>> of using fixed 32-bit bitdepth?
>>
>> Yeah, sure, I just had in mind that likely 99% of all users are using
>> the default value for nForceBpp and thus the code will use 32 bpp here
>> with my patch.
>>
>>  Thomas
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
>