When the kernel event queue overruns, the evdev.c will:
1. Skip events until and up to the next SYN_REPORT
2. Count depressed grab buttons on seat devices.
3. If the depressed grab button count is different, update
it atomically. If it changed to zero, call grab cancelation.
Potential pitfalls:
On 03/27, RenoX wrote:
>While I won't comment about the ban itself, I'm not so sure that this
>part:
>[1]dar...@chaosreigns.com�wrote:
>> The final problem was that, despite his proclamations that he intended to
>> keep his forks compatible with wayland, he refused to use the ex
While I won't comment about the ban itself, I'm not so sure that this part:
dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
> The final problem was that, despite his proclamations that he intended to
keep his forks compatible with wayland, he refused to use the existing
mechanism to retain protocol compatibility to
On 03/26/2013 10:51 PM Matt Turner wrote:
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Bengt Richter wrote:
uint32_t
component_delta2(uint32_t next, uint32_t prev)
{
return next&0xff00ff)-(prev&0xff00ff)+0x100)&0xff00ff)+
(((next&0xff00)-(prev&0xff00))&0xff00));
}
Does removing all the
Hardening,
First, as a disclaimer, I don't know weston backends all that well and
I don't know FreeRDP at all. However, I'll review as best as I can.
As a general comment, there's one thing that worries me about your
design: You update the peers on every repaint. If you have a single
peer with a
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Bengt Richter wrote:
> uint32_t
> component_delta2(uint32_t next, uint32_t prev)
> {
> return next&0xff00ff)-(prev&0xff00ff)+0x100)&0xff00ff)+
> (((next&0xff00)-(prev&0xff00))&0xff00));
> }
Does removing all the spaces make it faster? ;)
__
On 03/26/2013 06:26 PM Rune Kjær Svendsen wrote:
(I'm re-sending this message because the attachment was too large for
mesa-dev, and because I want to add wayland-devel CC. The valgrind output
can be found here: http://runeks.dk/files/callgrind.out.11362).
Seems like you are right Pekka.
I just
On terça-feira, 26 de março de 2013 12.50.46, Nick Kisialiou wrote:
> I'm not a Wayland developer but I suspect it wouldn't be wise to lump
> Wayland (protocol) and Weston (compositor) together on this issue.
>
> Wayland:
> I'm not sure why it is a problem that Wayland patches take time to be
> mer
On terça-feira, 26 de março de 2013 19.32.54, Bernhard Friedreich wrote:
> What I've been wondering lately (and also in the light of recent events) is
> if there is a specific reason why there's no CI (Jenkins?) and/or
> reviewboard system (Gerrit?). Is it because reviewing patches on the
> maillin
I'm not a Wayland developer but I suspect it wouldn't be wise to lump
Wayland (protocol) and Weston (compositor) together on this issue.
Wayland:
I'm not sure why it is a problem that Wayland patches take time to be
merged. Isn't it the whole point of any protocol to be as stable as
possible? If t
Hi!
I've been reading this list since the start of wayland/weston (on google
groups) and would like to thank you all for your ongoing effort :)
What I've been wondering lately (and also in the light of recent events) is
if there is a specific reason why there's no CI (Jenkins?) and/or
reviewboard
Recent circumstances have shown that patch reviewing in Wayland and Weston is
becoming a bottleneck for development (at least, it is perceived to be). This
email is intended to begin addressing that.
TL;DR: if you want to help, the best thing you can do right now is review
other people's contri
(I'm re-sending this message because the attachment was too large for
mesa-dev, and because I want to add wayland-devel CC. The valgrind output
can be found here: http://runeks.dk/files/callgrind.out.11362).
Seems like you are right Pekka.
I just ran weston through valgrind, and got some interest
A couple people have said that from the outside, it looks bad that Scott
forked Wayland and then got kicked out. They requested somebody post an
explanation to this mailing list. I think this is pretty reasonable. I
have no authority, and can't speak for anybody but myself, but I saw all of
what
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 8:24 AM, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> On Mar 26, 2013 3:28 AM, "Dave Airlie" wrote:
>>
>> > +++ b/src/wayland-private.h
>> > @@ -74,15 +74,9 @@ int wl_connection_write(struct wl_connection
>> > *connection, const void *data, size
>> > int wl_connection_queue(struct wl_connecti
On Mar 26, 2013 3:28 AM, "Dave Airlie" wrote:
>
> > +++ b/src/wayland-private.h
> > @@ -74,15 +74,9 @@ int wl_connection_write(struct wl_connection
*connection, const void *data, size
> > int wl_connection_queue(struct wl_connection *connection,
> > const void *data, size_
> +++ b/src/wayland-private.h
> @@ -74,15 +74,9 @@ int wl_connection_write(struct wl_connection *connection,
> const void *data, size
> int wl_connection_queue(struct wl_connection *connection,
> const void *data, size_t count);
>
> -union wl_argument {
> - int32_t i
17 matches
Mail list logo
