On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 09:28:14 +0900 wataru_natsume <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello Pekka-san, > > > Thank you so much for your review and proposal. > I will send another patch of the warning removal and memory leak which > you kindly found during this topic. > > Thanks, > Wataru Natsume > > On 2016-02-19 20:20, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > > On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 08:48:40 +0900 > > Wataru Natsume <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> From: Wataru Natsume <[email protected]> > >> > >> Previous code cleaned up surfaces in layer once and then added > >> surfaces to a layer in random. In this flow, two commitchanges are > >> required. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <[email protected]> > >> [[email protected]: Removes unnecessary check] > >> Signed-off-by: Wataru Natsume <[email protected]> > >> > >> --- > >> Changes from v1 - Removes unnecessary check if the surface is on a > >> layer. > >> > >> ivi-shell/hmi-controller.c | 9 --------- > >> 1 file changed, 9 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/ivi-shell/hmi-controller.c b/ivi-shell/hmi-controller.c > >> index 8da3d3c..ace6555 100644 > >> --- a/ivi-shell/hmi-controller.c > >> +++ b/ivi-shell/hmi-controller.c > >> @@ -424,18 +424,9 @@ mode_random_replace(struct hmi_controller > >> *hmi_ctrl, > >> > >> wl_list_for_each(application_layer, layer_list, link) { > >> layers[layer_idx] = application_layer; > >> - > >> ivi_layout_interface->layer_set_render_order(layers[layer_idx]->ivilayer, > >> - NULL, 0); > >> layer_idx++; > >> } > >> > >> - /* > >> - * This commit change is needed because ivisurface can not belongs > >> to several layers > >> - * at the same time. So ivisurfaces shall be removed from layers > >> once and then set them > >> - * to layers randomly. > >> - */ > >> - ivi_layout_interface->commit_changes(); > >> - > >> for (i = 0; i < surface_length; i++) { > >> ivisurf = pp_surface[i]; > >> > > > > Hi Natsume-san, > > > > this looks fine at first, but when testing it, mode_random_replace() > > will trigger one "ivi_layout_layer_add_surface: addsurf is already > > available" warning per existing surface. > > > > ivi_layout_layer_add_surface() is checking if the surface is already > > (current, not the pending state) on the given layer. This is likely > > because in a previously intended future a surface might be in multiple > > layers, and adding it multiple times to the same layer is considered a > > mistake (given how surface positioning works in this ivi-layout API > > design, that is understandable). > > > > Maybe we should also just remove that check from > > ivi_layout_layer_add_surface()? I don't see any value from it in the > > current code base. If Emre adds views as a tying object in the > > ivi-layout API, this code will get rewritten anyway. > > > > Apart from the harmless log spew, this patch is: > > Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <[email protected]> > > > > If you want to make a patch to remove the warning, I can push the both > > patches at the same time. Pushed: 7e7f793..9d8b441 master -> master Thanks, pq
pgp0H9DQQTHTG.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
