Mike Hearn schrieb: > On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 21:16:05 +0000, Eddahbi Karim wrote: > >>Now the mouse problem comes back but the workarounds don't work this >>time. It's not a regression, it's a bug enhancement.
ACK >> >>The old workaround for WineX still work according to gentoo-forums [2]. > > > It seems Warcraft relies upon NULL-addressed VirtualAlloc starting > allocation from above a certain range - possibly they're pulling some > silly bit-twiddling hack or optimisation. The Cedega patch linked to on > the forums basically hints to mmap that it should allocate at a fixed > address in this case: > > http://lists.transgaming.org/pipermail/winex-devel/2004-May/000259.html I tried that logic with the mmap wrapper but that did not help ... with and without printf. I'm just wondering of this code because start address must be a multiple of pagesize. WoW allocs sometimes less ... like 2 or 178 bytes. > > Which for WoW they seem to set this hint to 256mb - is there some aspect > of the NT kernel we're not correctly implementing here? Does Windows > always allocate from 256mb upwards? > > Alexandre, Mike - does hinting to mmap in the port library as TransGaming > do it seem like a good solution here or would it be better to adapt the > preloader to block off the lowest $X megs? I'm away for a week so I dont have time to hack and test this into wine ... and I have no time for gaming either :-/ chris > > thanks -mike > > >