On Mon, 27 Nov 2023 20:22:40 GMT, Thorsten Fischer <d...@openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Hi,
>> 
>> I did open the bug report. Some notes to this PR:
>> 
>> My colleagues and I are able to reproduce this bug regularly, even though it 
>> takes sometimes up to 3 or 4 weeks until the D3DERR_DEVICEHUNG error shows 
>> up. We are currently evaluating two versions of fixes, but until now we do 
>> not have any results. I will post them as soon as I got them.
>> 
>> Version 1 (this version): Based on the observation, that the 
>> TestCooperativeLevel/CheckDeviceState method returns D3D_OK again after 
>> about 20 - 60 seconds, the reinitialize is called after the first time the 
>> state is returning D3D_OK. The 'isHung' flag stores the information until 
>> then.
>> 
>> Version 2: calls reinitialize directly after D3DERR_DEVICEHUNG has been 
>> returned. Basically
>> if (hr == D3DERR_DEVICEREMOVED || hr == D3DERR_DEVICEHUNG  ) { .. }
>> 
>> I did not modify the validatePresent method, as for our workaround (see 
>> ticket) it was not necessary. At least the native call swapchain->present 
>> dows not return that error code 
>> (https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/d3d9/nf-d3d9-idirect3dswapchain9-present).
>>  I did not look decisively into all the native calls behind 
>> D3DRTTexture#readPixels.
>> 
>> As I said I will post the results (prism.verbose output) for the 2 versions 
>> later as a base for discussions.
>
> Thorsten Fischer has updated the pull request incrementally with one 
> additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Updated copyright year in D3DContext.cc

Thx, Thorsten. No, the crashes only happen about once every 10 hours and only 
on a few of the G6's. I finally found the javaFX code in a zip file under a 
production folder, and we made the change there (after unzippimg it). We put in 
a few logger debug statements and are only looping one minute - we'll remove 
those after this try. 
Looks like you guys are ready to release this fix.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1199#issuecomment-1829188309

Reply via email to