On 9 May 2016 at 12:45, Pekka Paalanen <[email protected]> wrote: > To make setting up a subsurface slightly easier by removing one > possibility for a glitch, this patch amends the specification to require > a wl_surface.commit on the parent surface for get_subsurface to > complete. The sub-surface cannot become mapped before a parent commit. > > This change may break existing clients that relied on the glitchy > sequence to not need a parent surface commit to map the sub-surface. > However, presumably all uses would at least issue a > wl_subsurface.set_position, which requires a parent surface commit to > apply. That would guarantee that there is a parent surface commit after > get_subsurface, and so reduces the chances of breaking anything. > > In other cases, this change may simply remove a possibility for the > glitch. > > This patch also adds a note about changing wl_surface.commit behaviour > on wl_subcompositor.get_subsurface. (That could be a separate patch.) > > The behaviour of wl_subsurface.destroy remains as specified, even though > it is now slightly asymmetrical to get_subsurface. This is emphasized by > adding the word "immediately". The effects of destruction were already > explicitly documented, as is the way to achieve synchronized unmapping, > so changing destruction behaviour would likely be more disruptive, and > also open up more corner cases (what would happen between destroy and > unmapping?).
Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
