Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

LAA patched engines?


  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

#31 Gcenx

Gcenx

    Veteran Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 373 posts
  • Graphics Card:Intel Iris
  • Operating System:macOS 10.12 (Sierra)

Posted 02 October 2018 - 12:38 PM

 1Mac, on 02 October 2018 - 02:58 AM, said:

If the update was Wineskin 2.8.6beta4: I tried running it with your new 3.17 staging 64bit engine. Crashed when I hit 2.48 gb of memory. If Wineskin is forcing wine64, should I be able to see it in Activity Monitor; i.e. should it say Wine64-preloader instead of Wine-preloader, or anything like that?

It's possible I'm just being unreasonable. Oblivion's engine is known to have certain limitations, and I might just have too high an expectation for it. I should try a run after disabling the LAA flag to see if it makes things worse; that would show if LAA is making a difference, just not as much as I'd like.

There are a couple of memory manager mods that move memory from RAM to VRAM and therefore free up memory, but I don't see any difference. I suppose I should post or submit a report for them at WineHQ, but they can be pretty persnickety over there, so I've been reluctant to do so.

No Wineskin 2.8.6beta5 is the current one, but I lightly will be setting that to disabled when I push the next wrapper update since it still needs work.

#32 1Mac

1Mac

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 53 posts
  • Graphics Card:Radeon Pro 555 2048 MB
  • Operating System:macOS 10.12 (Sierra)

Posted 02 October 2018 - 07:17 PM

Ah, thanks for that. Unfortunately this version crashed at about the same memory usage. Like I said, maybe everything is actually working fine and I'm just being greedy. I'll try a run with LAA disabled at some point and report (Edit, turns out I can't disable LAA without disrupting my mod setup; that is, the Oblivion Script Extender doesn't recognize the exe with LAA turn off, and basically I can't run anything without it :( ).

Is there a way to tell if wine64 is being successfully forced, like in Activity Monitor or somewhere else?

#33 Gcenx

Gcenx

    Veteran Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 373 posts
  • Graphics Card:Intel Iris
  • Operating System:macOS 10.12 (Sierra)

Posted 02 October 2018 - 08:23 PM

 1Mac, on 02 October 2018 - 07:17 PM, said:

Ah, thanks for that. Unfortunately this version crashed at about the same memory usage. Like I said, maybe everything is actually working fine and I'm just being greedy. I'll try a run with LAA disabled at some point and report (Edit, turns out I can't disable LAA without disrupting my mod setup; that is, the Oblivion Script Extender doesn't recognize the exe with LAA turn off, and basically I can't run anything without it :( ).

Is there a way to tell if wine64 is being successfully forced, like in Activity Monitor or somewhere else?

If you enabled the checkbox and it still crashes then I gues that’s the limit unless the 2gb limit is patched to 3gb but you won’t get much more then your have already.

The next update I will be disabeling that feature or reworking it not decided yet I have some other bug fixes to complete and possibly to to figure out why myself and some others can still use Wineskin on Mojave but others can’t... that’s really confusing....
Maybe I should test it out on Apple store display systems and see if they crash or not 🤣

#34 Incredible Hulk

Incredible Hulk

    Professional Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 185 posts
  • Graphics Card:6750M, OSX 10.12.2
  • Operating System:Other OS/Not specified
  • I like to play:PES, COD, Grid, FNV, RO

Posted 02 October 2018 - 11:32 PM

In CrossOver when you make the launcher app and than in finder cmd+i that launcher and deselect the option "open in 32bit mode", it will load wine64loader plus main 32bit exe.

Does that make any difference I don't know but if it is, could the same be implemented for Wineskin "custom exe" shortcut-launchers?

#35 Gcenx

Gcenx

    Veteran Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 373 posts
  • Graphics Card:Intel Iris
  • Operating System:macOS 10.12 (Sierra)

Posted 03 October 2018 - 02:07 AM

 Incredible Hulk, on 02 October 2018 - 11:32 PM, said:

In CrossOver when you make the launcher app and than in finder cmd+i that launcher and deselect the option "open in 32bit mode", it will load wine64loader plus main 32bit exe.

Does that make any difference I don't know but if it is, could the same be implemented for Wineskin "custom exe" shortcut-launchers?

I no longer have that option as I'm now running Mojave, but no that I believe just disables 32bit processes from being launch so that could break wine.

The thing I do want to figure out is how CrossOver uses the Launchers Icon instead of the in-built exe's icon as I don't remember seeing anything in the source code on 17.5.1 pertaining to that feature.

#36 1Mac

1Mac

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 53 posts
  • Graphics Card:Radeon Pro 555 2048 MB
  • Operating System:macOS 10.12 (Sierra)

Posted 03 October 2018 - 02:10 AM

 Gcenx, on 02 October 2018 - 08:23 PM, said:

If you enabled the checkbox and it still crashes then I gues that’s the limit unless the 2gb limit is patched to 3gb but you won’t get much more then your have already.

Ah. I did not realize there was a checkbox. Anyway, I ran it with force wine64 and failed to launch: "preloader: Warning: failed to reserve range 00007fff40000000-00007fff41ff0000
wine: '/Applications/Applications/Games/RPG/Oblivion.app/Contents/Resources' is a 32-bit installation, it cannot support 64-bit applications." I had it on a 64 bit engine, but I guess I need to try it in a fresh 64-bit wrapper. That's doable but may take some time!

#37 Gcenx

Gcenx

    Veteran Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 373 posts
  • Graphics Card:Intel Iris
  • Operating System:macOS 10.12 (Sierra)

Posted 03 October 2018 - 05:09 PM

 1Mac, on 03 October 2018 - 02:10 AM, said:

Ah. I did not realize there was a checkbox. Anyway, I ran it with force wine64 and failed to launch: "preloader: Warning: failed to reserve range 00007fff40000000-00007fff41ff0000
wine: '/Applications/Applications/Games/RPG/Oblivion.app/Contents/Resources' is a 32-bit installation, it cannot support 64-bit applications." I had it on a 64 bit engine, but I guess I need to try it in a fresh 64-bit wrapper. That's doable but may take some time!

Yeah a 64Bit prefix is required along with a 64Bit Engine.

The new update I pushed hidden the checkbox but the feature is still built into WineskinLauncher so adding
ForceWine64
into the wrappers info.plist setting it to Number and setting that to "1" will have wine launch the desired exe using "wine64" instead of the usual "wine"


Edit;
I have now removed that feature as it really made no difference overall.

#38 1Mac

1Mac

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 53 posts
  • Graphics Card:Radeon Pro 555 2048 MB
  • Operating System:macOS 10.12 (Sierra)

Posted 15 February 2019 - 05:03 PM

I finally was motivated to do a test with a fully modded install and a 64-bit prefix. The result was much better, more stable memory usage. I crashed out at 2.6 gb, which is actually consistent with what a LAA program is supposed to do ("4gb patch" is a bit misleading).

Which is to say: for large address aware programs, it does make a difference whether you are using a 32-bit or 64-bit prefix.

(What I'd like to know now is why fonts and menus that are perfectly fine with a 32-bit engine are all messed up with a 64-bit one. This pertains to both Wine functions like wineconfig and to tools such as mod managers and the like.)

#39 Incredible Hulk

Incredible Hulk

    Professional Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 185 posts
  • Graphics Card:6750M, OSX 10.12.2
  • Operating System:Other OS/Not specified
  • I like to play:PES, COD, Grid, FNV, RO

Posted 15 February 2019 - 06:22 PM

@1Mac What program do you use for tracking memory usage?
It would be nice if you could you post some data. 32bit vs 64bit LAA patch, engine used etc. to resolve this once and for all :)


#40 1Mac

1Mac

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 53 posts
  • Graphics Card:Radeon Pro 555 2048 MB
  • Operating System:macOS 10.12 (Sierra)

Posted 15 February 2019 - 06:52 PM

Mac OS Activity Monitor.

I'm not sure what you mean by 32bit vs 64bit LAA. I thought LAA patching was something you did to 32bit programs so they'd make better use of memory available in a 64bit environment. LAA patching a 64bit program seems redundant, but I'm probably missing something.

As it happens I was running a Wine 3.19 64bit engine. I wasn't explicitly testing this issue when I figured this out, so I wasn't being particularly rigorous. I can do a more formal test with the latest 32 and 64 bit Wine engines for the sake of certainty.

#41 Incredible Hulk

Incredible Hulk

    Professional Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 185 posts
  • Graphics Card:6750M, OSX 10.12.2
  • Operating System:Other OS/Not specified
  • I like to play:PES, COD, Grid, FNV, RO

Posted 15 February 2019 - 09:57 PM

I thought about running game in 32bit vs 64bit wrapper with same winetricks and dll overrides.
Someone said that it doesn't matter for the way the Wine works but hell out if it's helpful in Windows it must be useful in Wine :)

#42 Incredible Hulk

Incredible Hulk

    Professional Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 185 posts
  • Graphics Card:6750M, OSX 10.12.2
  • Operating System:Other OS/Not specified
  • I like to play:PES, COD, Grid, FNV, RO

Posted 15 February 2019 - 10:28 PM

Duplicate post

#43 Gcenx

Gcenx

    Veteran Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 373 posts
  • Graphics Card:Intel Iris
  • Operating System:macOS 10.12 (Sierra)

Posted 16 February 2019 - 02:46 PM

 1Mac, on 15 February 2019 - 05:03 PM, said:

I finally was motivated to do a test with a fully modded install and a 64-bit prefix. The result was much better, more stable memory usage. I crashed out at 2.6 gb, which is actually consistent with what a LAA program is supposed to do ("4gb patch" is a bit misleading).

Which is to say: for large address aware programs, it does make a difference whether you are using a 32-bit or 64-bit prefix.

(What I'd like to know now is why fonts and menus that are perfectly fine with a 32-bit engine are all messed up with a 64-bit one. This pertains to both Wine functions like wineconfig and to tools such as mod managers and the like.)
I’m not sure why your getting a font issue as I have freetype set to 35 rendering mode for all wine/-preloaded/wine64/-preloaded processes in my current wrapper versions as needed.
(Newer wine versions support the newer freetype rendering modes anyway)

 1Mac, on 15 February 2019 - 06:52 PM, said:

Mac OS Activity Monitor.

I'm not sure what you mean by 32bit vs 64bit LAA. I thought LAA patching was something you did to 32bit programs so they'd make better use of memory available in a 64bit environment. LAA patching a 64bit program seems redundant, but I'm probably missing something.

As it happens I was running a Wine 3.19 64bit engine. I wasn't explicitly testing this issue when I figured this out, so I wasn't being particularly rigorous. I can do a more formal test with the latest 32 and 64 bit Wine engines for the sake of certainty.

If you want to get better testing results overall might want to use Wine4.0/Wine-4.1 those had a lot of improvements over the earlier 3.x versions. I had good results for my usual games using these versions.

#44 1Mac

1Mac

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 53 posts
  • Graphics Card:Radeon Pro 555 2048 MB
  • Operating System:macOS 10.12 (Sierra)

Posted 17 February 2019 - 12:51 AM

 Gcenx, on 16 February 2019 - 02:46 PM, said:

If you want to get better testing results overall might want to use Wine4.0/Wine-4.1 those had a lot of improvements over the earlier 3.x versions. I had good results for my usual games using these versions.
I just tried them out, and despite a weird rendering bug with 4.1 and SweetFX, they work great! Ironically, they work so well that I'm having a hard time forcing a crash, meaning I may want to try older engines for the purposes of this test. So far I've only been able to force a crash in the 32-bit engine, using just a little more memory than where I topped out crash-free on the 64-bit engine. It's not a great result, so again I may need to try with some older engines.

Quote

I’m not sure why your getting a font issue as I have freetype set to 35 rendering mode for all wine/-preloaded/wine64/-preloaded processes in my current wrapper versions as needed.
(Newer wine versions support the newer freetype rendering modes anyway)
I may start a new topic on the subject. It's not just the fonts, which are readable if ugly; it's menus rendering badly, as in invisible and/or improperly positioned text, that makes them almost unusable.

#45 Gcenx

Gcenx

    Veteran Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 373 posts
  • Graphics Card:Intel Iris
  • Operating System:macOS 10.12 (Sierra)

Posted 17 February 2019 - 01:08 AM

 1Mac, on 17 February 2019 - 12:51 AM, said:

I just tried them out, and despite a weird rendering bug with 4.1 and SweetFX, they work great! Ironically, they work so well that I'm having a hard time forcing a crash, meaning I may want to try older engines for the purposes of this test. So far I've only been able to force a crash in the 32-bit engine, using just a little more memory than where I topped out crash-free on the 64-bit engine. It's not a great result, so again I may need to try with some older engines.

Yeah I have been very happy with how stable Wine4.x has been currently.

 1Mac, on 17 February 2019 - 12:51 AM, said:

I may start a new topic on the subject. It's not just the fonts, which are readable if ugly; it's menus rendering badly, as in invisible and/or improperly positioned text, that makes them almost unusable.

That sounds like a good idea, plus screenshots so we can get an example of what you mean, I'm wondering if it's one of the known bugs or something else you experiencing with that.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users