diff --git a/src/xenia/gpu/command_processor.cc b/src/xenia/gpu/command_processor.cc index cc8e80690..ce08d19bd 100644 --- a/src/xenia/gpu/command_processor.cc +++ b/src/xenia/gpu/command_processor.cc @@ -369,7 +369,7 @@ void CommandProcessor::WriteRegister(uint32_t index, uint32_t value) { case XE_GPU_REG_DC_LUT_SEQ_COLOR: { // Should be in the 256-entry table writing mode. assert_zero(regs[XE_GPU_REG_DC_LUT_RW_MODE] & 0b1); - auto& gamma_ramp_rw_index = regs.Get(); + auto gamma_ramp_rw_index = regs.Get(); // DC_LUT_SEQ_COLOR is in the red, green, blue order, but the write // enable mask is blue, green, red. bool write_gamma_ramp_component = @@ -395,7 +395,11 @@ void CommandProcessor::WriteRegister(uint32_t index, uint32_t value) { } if (++gamma_ramp_rw_component_ >= 3) { gamma_ramp_rw_component_ = 0; - ++gamma_ramp_rw_index.rw_index; + reg::DC_LUT_RW_INDEX new_gamma_ramp_rw_index = gamma_ramp_rw_index; + ++new_gamma_ramp_rw_index.rw_index; + WriteRegister( + XE_GPU_REG_DC_LUT_RW_INDEX, + xe::memory::Reinterpret(new_gamma_ramp_rw_index)); } if (write_gamma_ramp_component) { OnGammaRamp256EntryTableValueWritten(); @@ -405,7 +409,7 @@ void CommandProcessor::WriteRegister(uint32_t index, uint32_t value) { case XE_GPU_REG_DC_LUT_PWL_DATA: { // Should be in the PWL writing mode. assert_not_zero(regs[XE_GPU_REG_DC_LUT_RW_MODE] & 0b1); - auto& gamma_ramp_rw_index = regs.Get(); + auto gamma_ramp_rw_index = regs.Get(); // Bit 7 of the index is ignored for PWL. uint32_t gamma_ramp_rw_index_pwl = gamma_ramp_rw_index.rw_index & 0x7F; // DC_LUT_PWL_DATA is likely in the red, green, blue order because @@ -424,13 +428,17 @@ void CommandProcessor::WriteRegister(uint32_t index, uint32_t value) { } if (++gamma_ramp_rw_component_ >= 3) { gamma_ramp_rw_component_ = 0; + reg::DC_LUT_RW_INDEX new_gamma_ramp_rw_index = gamma_ramp_rw_index; // TODO(Triang3l): Should this increase beyond 7 bits for PWL? // Direct3D 9 explicitly sets rw_index to 0x80 after writing the last // PWL entry. However, the DC_LUT_RW_INDEX documentation says that for // PWL, the bit 7 is ignored. - gamma_ramp_rw_index.rw_index = + new_gamma_ramp_rw_index.rw_index = (gamma_ramp_rw_index.rw_index & ~UINT32_C(0x7F)) | ((gamma_ramp_rw_index_pwl + 1) & 0x7F); + WriteRegister( + XE_GPU_REG_DC_LUT_RW_INDEX, + xe::memory::Reinterpret(new_gamma_ramp_rw_index)); } if (write_gamma_ramp_component) { OnGammaRampPWLValueWritten(); @@ -440,7 +448,7 @@ void CommandProcessor::WriteRegister(uint32_t index, uint32_t value) { case XE_GPU_REG_DC_LUT_30_COLOR: { // Should be in the 256-entry table writing mode. assert_zero(regs[XE_GPU_REG_DC_LUT_RW_MODE] & 0b1); - auto& gamma_ramp_rw_index = regs.Get(); + auto gamma_ramp_rw_index = regs.Get(); uint32_t gamma_ramp_write_enable_mask = regs[XE_GPU_REG_DC_LUT_WRITE_EN_MASK] & 0b111; if (gamma_ramp_write_enable_mask) { @@ -457,11 +465,16 @@ void CommandProcessor::WriteRegister(uint32_t index, uint32_t value) { gamma_ramp_entry.color_10_red = gamma_ramp_value.color_10_red; } } - ++gamma_ramp_rw_index.rw_index; // TODO(Triang3l): Should this reset the component write index? If this // increase is assumed to behave like a full DC_LUT_RW_INDEX write, it - // probably should. + // probably should. Currently this also calls WriteRegister for + // DC_LUT_RW_INDEX, which resets gamma_ramp_rw_component_ as well. gamma_ramp_rw_component_ = 0; + reg::DC_LUT_RW_INDEX new_gamma_ramp_rw_index = gamma_ramp_rw_index; + ++new_gamma_ramp_rw_index.rw_index; + WriteRegister( + XE_GPU_REG_DC_LUT_RW_INDEX, + xe::memory::Reinterpret(new_gamma_ramp_rw_index)); if (gamma_ramp_write_enable_mask) { OnGammaRamp256EntryTableValueWritten(); }