On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 17:19:20 -0800
Lloyd Pique wrote:
> Hi Pekka,
>
> I did upload a new set of patches back in September:
>
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/247841/
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/247842/
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/247843/
>
> I understand fro
On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 14:54:16 -0700
Lloyd Pique wrote:
> Hi Pekka,
>
> Sorry for the lack of any updates for (over) a month. I was on holiday for
> a while, and had a few other things come up delaying me from getting back
> to this.
Hi,
so was I! :-)
>
> I've created a first set of patches (se
On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 21:06:15 -0700
Lloyd Pique wrote:
> I did think of one more option to avoid the dup() abort.
>
> - Open MAX_FDS_OUT to reserve a pool of fds (open /dev/nul or something
> innocuous)
> - Whenever the core client needs to dup a caller fd, use dup2/dup3 on an fd
> in the pool
>
On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 13:23:44 -0700
Lloyd Pique wrote:
> Hi Pekka,
>
> - ABI to query a "flush recommended" flag; This flag would be set when
> > the soft-buffer is at least half-full, and cleared when it drops
> > to... below half? empty?
>
>
> This sounds reasonable, I'm happy to incorp
On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 12:10:36 -0700
Lloyd Pique wrote:
> Hi Pekka,
>
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 5:12 AM Pekka Paalanen wrote:
>
> > If I'm reading the code right, MAX_FDS_OUT is only a limit for a single
> > sendmsg() call. The fds_out buffer is capable of holding 1k fds.
> >
>
> > We have 4
Hi Pekka,
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 5:12 AM Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> I think the aim should be to remove the abort(). I do not see any
> reason to leave it in even as an option.
>
Thank you. Will proceeed in that direction.
> The soft-buffer in libwayland-client is quite small, the kernel socket
On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 19:54:23 -0700
Lloyd Pique wrote:
> Let me take things back a step. I was a bit too hasty in suggesting
> something that would work for me for the fact that MAX_FDS_OUT is small. In
> our client the buffer creation ends up being serialized, and so only one
> thread will be cre
On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 18:41:28 -0700
Lloyd Pique wrote:
> Hi Pekka!
>
> Thank you for the feedback. In the end, I think we have a good basic
> agreement about the patch, and after reading your linked bug (
> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland/issues/12), which I was
> previously unawar
Hi Pekka!
Thank you for the feedback. In the end, I think we have a good basic
agreement about the patch, and after reading your linked bug (
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland/issues/12), which I was
previously unaware of, it sounds like I will be just stripping out the
callback+retry
On Tue, 5 Jun 2018 18:14:54 -0700
Lloyd Pique wrote:
> Introduce a new call wl_display_set_error_handler_client(), which allows
> a client to register a callback function which is invoked if there is an
> error (possibly transient) while sending messages to the server.
>
> This allows a Wayland
10 matches
Mail list logo
