Add bounds checking when writing to the temp index buffer when expanding primitives #17387
Conversation
…offset instead of the pointer.
| u16 *newInds = inds + vertexCount; | ||
| u16 *indsOut = newInds; | ||
| const u16 *indsIn = (const u16 *)(inds + indsOffset); | ||
| int newIndsOffset = indsOffset + vertexCount; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe it'd be cleaner for result.indsBuffer or something to exist, and be the resulting index pointer. We already use result.drawBuffer, so it'd make the code more symmetrical and probably easier to understand.
-[Unknown]
| bool SoftwareTransform::ExpandPoints(int vertexCount, int &maxIndex, u16 *inds, int &indsOffset, int indexBufferSize, const TransformedVertex *transformed, TransformedVertex *transformedExpanded, int &numTrans, bool throughmode) { | ||
| // Before we start, do a sanity check - does the output fit? | ||
| if (vertexCount * 6 > indexBufferSize - indsOffset) { | ||
| // Won't fit, kill the draw. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should probably log, if not report this situation. It could mean it's running garbage (most likely?) but might actually be some kind of effect.
-[Unknown]
|
I feel like we found in FF4 or some game that surprisingly high resulting vertex counts from spline/bezier are valid, so I worry about trying to cap it incorrectly... -[Unknown] |
|
Closing this, seems increasing the buffer size did the trick as I haven't seen any repeat of this yet. Though I do want to make things clearer and more "intentional" around these buffers at some point. |
Not sure whether it make the most sense to:
Opinions? At least this one feels the safest...