Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat(gta-core-five): increase ped alternate variations #3190

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

DaniGP17
Copy link
Contributor

@DaniGP17 DaniGP17 commented Feb 24, 2025

Goal of this PR

Try increasing the hard-coded size for Ped Alternate Variations. This is just an untested attempt as I haven't had the resources to reproduce the issue but I'll try to test it with someone to confirm if this actually works.

Currently looking for reproduction resources to test if this work, if you have you can send to me in discord danielgp.

How is this PR achieving the goal

By patching all the sizes passed to the alloca function calculating the new size of the alternate varations, I have increased it to double the original value, that is, to 320.

This PR applies to the following area(s)

FiveM

Successfully tested on

Game builds: At least patterns work in b1 & b3095
Platforms: Windows

Checklist

  • Code compiles and has been tested successfully.
  • Code explains itself well and/or is documented.
  • My commit message explains what the changes do and what they are for.
  • No extra compilation warnings are added by these changes.

Fixes issues

fixes #2760

@github-actions github-actions bot added the invalid Requires changes before it's considered valid and can be (re)triaged label Feb 24, 2025
@DaniGP17 DaniGP17 marked this pull request as draft February 24, 2025 21:27
@github-actions github-actions bot added triage Needs a preliminary assessment to determine the urgency and required action and removed invalid Requires changes before it's considered valid and can be (re)triaged labels Feb 25, 2025
@DaniGP17
Copy link
Contributor Author

This might be merged once #3195 is in production.
May be is a good idea to add the has-dependencies tag.

@DaniGP17 DaniGP17 marked this pull request as ready for review February 25, 2025 13:09
@github-actions github-actions bot added invalid Requires changes before it's considered valid and can be (re)triaged and removed triage Needs a preliminary assessment to determine the urgency and required action labels Feb 25, 2025
@prikolium-cfx prikolium-cfx added has-dependencies Blocked by or requires another change, read PR description. and removed invalid Requires changes before it's considered valid and can be (re)triaged labels Mar 6, 2025
@prikolium-cfx
Copy link
Collaborator

This might be merged once #3195 is in production. May be is a good idea to add the has-dependencies tag.

But dependency PR is not server side change, probably they can be just merged together one by one?
Also I can offer to push them both to experimental branch to properly test it, what do you think?

@DaniGP17
Copy link
Contributor Author

DaniGP17 commented Mar 6, 2025

But dependency PR is not server side change, probably they can be just merged together one by one?

Yes, both could be merged one by one, but key_value told me that in order to merge the limit increase the crash patch had to be in place first, I assumed it was so that when the limit increase was in the beta or canary branch they wouldn't make players on their server play on those branches so they wouldn't get the crash. I don't know if I explained myself or if what I said even makes sense 😅

Also I can offer to push them both to experimental branch to properly test it, what do you think?

Yes, it's perfect, I've already tried it and it seems to work, but if more people try it and confirm that it works well, then even better.

@prikolium-cfx
Copy link
Collaborator

But dependency PR is not server side change, probably they can be just merged together one by one?

Yes, both could be merged one by one, but key_value told me that in order to merge the limit increase the crash patch had to be in place first, I assumed it was so that when the limit increase was in the beta or canary branch they wouldn't make players on their server play on those branches so they wouldn't get the crash. I don't know if I explained myself or if what I said even makes sense 😅

Also I can offer to push them both to experimental branch to properly test it, what do you think?

Yes, it's perfect, I've already tried it and it seems to work, but if more people try it and confirm that it works well, then even better.

Ah, right, key_value is right.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
has-dependencies Blocked by or requires another change, read PR description.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

RAGE error: ERR_MEM_MULTIALLOC_FREE crash when hitting cloth ped alternate variations limit
2 participants