On 27 April 2018 at 14:16, Peter Maydell <[email protected]> wrote: > On 12 March 2018 at 09:14, Gerd Hoffmann <[email protected]> wrote: >> Add support for cursor dmabufs. qemu has to render the cursor for >> that, so in case a cursor is present qemu allocates a new dmabuf, blits >> the scanout, blends in the pointer and passes on the new dmabuf to >> spice-server. Without cursor qemu continues to simply pass on the >> scanout dmabuf as-is. >> >> Signed-off-by: Gerd Hoffmann <[email protected]> >> Reviewed-by: Marc-André Lureau <[email protected]> >> Message-id: [email protected] >> +static void qemu_spice_gl_cursor_position(DisplayChangeListener *dcl, >> + uint32_t pos_x, uint32_t pos_y) >> +{ >> + SimpleSpiceDisplay *ssd = container_of(dcl, SimpleSpiceDisplay, dcl); >> + >> + ssd->ptr_x = pos_x; >> + ssd->ptr_y = pos_y; > > Is it safe to write to these fields of ssd without holding > ssd->lock ? Coverity thinks it might not be (CID 1390631) because > we do take the lock to update them in display_mouse_set().
Ping for opinions on this coverity issue? thanks -- PMM
