Vista Magnification API: MagSetImageScalingCallback() doesn't work?
in [Win32 Kernel]
|
From: Grzegorz Wróbel on 14 Jun 2008 15:09 Hi, I am able to succesfully call MagSetImageScalingCallback() to set new MagImageScalingCallback function, however my callback function gets called only 2-3 times and it provides 4x4 pixel source data (with some garbage instead source pixels). My source rectangle is 256x256 pixels. Are there any sample how to use custom MagImageScalingCallback function? Or is this part of Vista magnification API simply broken? Or is it that this functionality is not implemented in all WDDM drivers? -- Grzegorz Wr�bel 677265676F727940346E6575726F6E732E636F6D
From: Ivan Brugiolo [MSFT] on 16 Jun 2008 23:10 The MagXXX APIs in Vista are meaningful only when milcore.dll is being used to produce a magnified view of the desktop, that may or may not be the case in your specific configuration. For most of practical usages, the image filtering callback is not that interesting. -- -- This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. Use of any included script samples are subject to the terms specified at http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm "Grzegorz Wr�bel" </dev/null(a)localhost.localdomain> wrote in message news:g32t8b$n2v$1(a)atlantis.news.neostrada.pl... > Grzegorz Wr�bel wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I am able to succesfully call MagSetImageScalingCallback() to set new >> MagImageScalingCallback function, however my callback function gets >> called only 2-3 times and it provides 4x4 pixel source data (with some >> garbage instead source pixels). My source rectangle is 256x256 pixels. >> > > Well, calling MagSetWindowSource() *before* MagSetImageScalingCallback() > makes my own MagImageScalingCallback function to be called with correct > pixel source data, however it still gets called only once. > > -- > Grzegorz Wr�bel > 677265676F727940346E6575726F6E732E636F6D
From: Ivan Brugiolo [MSFT] on 19 Jun 2008 12:25 What you observed is consistent with the status of the MagXXX apis in Vista. Even with desktop composition OFF, if you are running at 8bpp, the MilCore-based magnification path will not be executed. With desktop composition-on or off, at 32, 24 and 16bpp, the Milcore-based code-path will be used. With desktop composition ON, window filtering will work, but not image filtering callback. With desktop composion OFF, window filtering will NOT work, and image filtering will work. `window-filtering` can work with composition-OFF using private APIs that relay on layered windows, and only on layered windows. This limitation cannot be fixed, and, will stay there. When MilCore is being used, magnification.dll uses the same rasterizer of WPF to produce the final to-be-displayed image. For example, this allows you to supply a color transform, and have the color transform to be imlemented by D3D9.L capable hardware. When desktop compositon is ON, magnification.dll receives a complete copy of the visual tree, and, it can apply transformation and prune visual elements, so that window filtering can be implemented. Most of these limitations will be addressed in the next version of the operative system. -- -- This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. Use of any included script samples are subject to the terms specified at http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm "Grzegorz Wr�bel" </dev/null(a)localhost.localdomain> wrote in message news:g38bpf$mns$1(a)nemesis.news.neostrada.pl... > Ivan Brugiolo [MSFT] wrote: >> The MagXXX APIs in Vista are meaningful only when >> milcore.dll is being used to produce a magnified view of the desktop, >> that may or may not be the case in your specific configuration. >> For most of practical usages, the image filtering callback is not >> that interesting. >> > > In the "debug version" I do have the Vista magnification control visible > on the screen. The successfully registered callback is called only once > (or on some machines not at all). > > Since it was hard to believe that some Vista APIs might be broken, I > thought that maybe it is that my graphic drivers that are not 100% WDDM > compatible. But I asked few persons with different hardware configuration > to run my code and they confirmed it that the registered magnification > callback is called only once (or not at all). > > > The most interesting fact is that this happens only when the DWM is on, > when it's off then magnification callback works! Only that I don't need it > to work with DWM off (especially that other magnification functions like > MagSetWindowFilterList() will not work with DWM off), I need it to work > with DWM on. > > > So if something doesn't work in current Vista release maybe it would be > worth to mention it in the documentation. ... Well the word > "documentation" sounds too proud. If you look at MSDN entry about > MagImageScalingCallback function: > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms692392(VS.85).aspx > > A child after few C++ classes will tell you a function declared like that > has no right to compile. Even if you fix obvious typos it is still > inconsistent with what I find in "magnification.h" from Windows Vista SDK. > > So all I have is the function declaration from magnification.h > But that's apparently the declaration of a function that doesn't work. > > > -- > Grzegorz Wr�bel > 677265676F727940346E6575726F6E732E636F6D
From: Ivan Brugiolo [MSFT] on 20 Jun 2008 22:50 Windows NT 7.0, in your terminology. What is the scenario why the Image Filtering Callback is interesting ? -- -- This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. Use of any included script samples are subject to the terms specified at http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm "Grzegorz Wr�bel" </dev/null(a)localhost.localdomain> wrote in message news:g3einj$pra$1(a)nemesis.news.neostrada.pl... > Ivan Brugiolo [MSFT] wrote: >> With desktop composition ON, window filtering will work, >> but not image filtering callback. >> With desktop composion OFF, window filtering will NOT work, >> and image filtering will work. >> >> `window-filtering` can work with composition-OFF using >> private APIs that relay on layered windows, and only on layered windows. >> This limitation cannot be fixed, and, will stay there. >> > > Lack of window filtering with DWM composition off is not that much of a > problem, since with DWM composition off the display is working the same as > on all pre-Vista Windows systems (where there was no Magnification API). > And for now I hardly imagine any developers releasing software that has > Windows Vista as minimum OS requirement. > > Not working filtering callback while DWM composition is on is a problem. > For me it meant the decision of dropping support for Windows Vista (the > code that works on pre-DWM displays doesn't work with DWM on). > >> >> Most of these limitations will be addressed in the next version of the >> operative system. >> > > Does it mean Windows Vista SP2 or Windows NT 7.0? > > -- > Grzegorz Wr�bel > 677265676F727940346E6575726F6E732E636F6D
From: Ivan Brugiolo [MSFT] on 22 Jun 2008 21:07 First of all, let me clarify the context where the image filtering callback was thought to be interesting, and, why that very same rationale made that un-interesting. The magnification APIs were created and exposed to allow simple magnification application (like the Intellimouse Magnifier, or the in-box magnifier) to provide a magnified view of the desktop in Vista with desktop composition enabled. All of the ISV developing solution for people with disabilities (mild visual impairment, blinds who needs screen readers, etc) have always used Mirror Drivers, or DDI filtering techniques in Win32k.sys to get the raw bits, and, to imlement image filtering and other sophisticated image enahancing post-filtering, OCR of text, etc, etc. Since with Vista the use of Mirror Drivers do disable Desktop compositon, the image filtering callback was thought as a cheap replacement for the need of installing a mirror driver, but, at the end of the day, the image filtering callback was of no practical use, because it lacked the other correlation and sepration that were availalble with WNDOBJs in the mirror drivers (together with the per DDI filtering). That said, let's discuss the magnification.dll limitations of Vista. The basic magnification functionality without desktop compositon is really a GDI-based stretch-blt with the source set to be the HDC of the screen (or of the desktop). In Vista, if you do not have WDDM, that is pretty much what you will get. With WDDM, and without desktop compositon, you can have some image enhancement, such as the ability to apply an arbitrary color-transform using the DX9 hardware. And, since the mechanism used to produce the source image for the transformation is in this scenario is always GDI based, the path to screen can easily be extended to implement an image filtering callback. GetDC() -> BitBlt() -> Invoke-Image-Callback -> UpdateTexture -> rasterize with d3d9. With WDDM and with desktop compositon active, the path to screen is different. The process hosting Magnification.dll has a worker thread (called the compositor thread) that receives a stream of compostion instructions and, produces a scene that is more-or-less faithful replica of the screen visual scene. At this point, in order to implement a maningful image filtering callback, you would need to render to a back-buffer, read the back-buffer to system memory, invoke the image filtering callback, push the bits to video-memory and then flip the content to the screen (I will not digress on how d3d9 apps get their windowed content in Vista, since it would be a very long story). I'm not sure if the full explanation is going to help solve your problem, but, if you feel that the image filtering callback is a product deficiency, feel free to open an incident case with CSS/PSS of your country. The problem of getting the desktop bits without any window in front of it may or may not have a meaningful solution. For example, assuming you have image-filtering and window-exclusion. Would you define the desktop as the Explorer List-View that hosts the backgroung image ? Would you define the desktop as the bottom-most window and all of the Sidebar gadgets ? In the first hypotesis, what would prevent calling PrintWindow on the explorer list-view ? > However on pre-DWM displays it was possible to filter out WS_EX_LAYERED > windows. On Vista with DWM composition it is not possible anymore. With desktop compostion ON, all of the top level window are forcefully layered (we call this step `redirection`). It would certainly be possible to implement a compatile behavior where only Layered-for-DWM window are captured, and the other are filtered unless the CAPTUREBITS flag is specified to bitblt (and in that case, even in WinXp, you would have gotten the layered windows as well). I'm still interested to the scenario: With Desktop Compostion ON, you should have pixel-perfect window-frames, glass and blur and shadows, and you should have linear filtering for the GDI content inside the windows. Maybe, if you had the image-filtering-callback, you could do bilinear or bicubic on the GDI content, but, that would require some non trivial clipping magic to know which portion is already magnified, which one is not magnified, and, which part are going to affect the blur of the glass in the sorrounding pixels. The other scenario that you seem to have exposed, is the simultaneous use of 1x magnification factor and window-filtering in order to get content for obscrured windows. While the idea is indeed intersting, the amount of resources consumed by the Vista magnifier for that scenario would not be worth the while, and, the PrintWindow API (or any API that references the window DC) would be a chaper solution, because you would force Dwm.exe to run a render-pass on an off-screen texture for the window (to get both the GDI content and the frame done rught) and return that content in a DibSection. Still not perfect, but, you would not need to duplicate the entire visual tree in the magnification.dll host process. -- -- This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. Use of any included script samples are subject to the terms specified at http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm "Grzegorz Wr�bel" </dev/null(a)localhost.localdomain> wrote in message news:g3j69k$nbe$1(a)nemesis.news.neostrada.pl... > Ivan Brugiolo [MSFT] wrote: >> What is the scenario why the Image Filtering Callback is interesting ? >> > > The most trivial scenario for which it is interesting is the one described > in Remarks section for MagSetImageScalingCallback Function. Ie ability to > provide more advanced filtering algorithms than what offers the default > MagSetWindowTransform(), which is just the simplest nearest neighbour > algorithm. This remarks section is just a science fiction for DWM enabled > desktops as long as the callback doesn't work. > > > But there is second use - the working magnification callback seems to be > the only way to get to the desktop bits filtered out of the given > window(s) with DWM composition turned on. And by stating "get to the bits" > I mean being able to read them programmatically. Because, although you can > use magnification control to filter out any windows, you *can't* get to > its bits, it's a black-box control. The working callback for external > filtering and scaling would be the only way to get them (they come in the > srcdata buffer). > You notice that this problem of getting desktop bits obscured by given > window is unsolved in any earlier Windows editions, and you could find > many posts in these newsgroups asking about that over the years with no > really good answer. However on pre-DWM displays it was possible to filter > out WS_EX_LAYERED windows. On Vista with DWM composition it is not > possible anymore. > > > Actually we had a conversation about this few months ago in different set > of newsgroups. And you suggested Magnification API for that in general and > magnification image scaling callback in particular. Now when it turns out > the callback doesn't work you are saying that "image filtering callback is > not that interesting". Which honestly I'm not sure how to interpret. Does > it mean that there is a new generation of MS programmers who implement > only this part of specification that they find "interesting"? > > The documentation for both MagSetImageScalingCallback() and > MagImageScalingCallback() is there, there is no mention they don't work > with WDDM, on the contrary. At which point they stopped being interesting? > Are there any performance issues with having such callback working under > WDDM? > > > The documentation says that these functions should work with WDDM (and not > work with XDM), which is completely opposite to reality. > > "This function requires Windows Display Driver Model (WDDM)-capable video > cards." from http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms692389(VS.85).aspx > > "This function requires LDDM capable video cards. It returns FALSE on > XPDM." from http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa468587.aspx > > Is there a bug in documentation or in implementation? > > Normally I would always assume the former, but in case where the new API > is added to the old, dying technology and not to the next-generation one I > can't help but thinking that someone mistakenly implemented the API for > the wrong driver model. > > -- > Grzegorz Wr�bel > 677265676F727940346E6575726F6E732E636F6D
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 Prev: Synchronous Notification of Change of IP Address Next: no static functions in WDK examples; |