On 21.06.2016 14:05, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 19:15:23 +0200 > Armin Krezović <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Currently, weston assumes a surface/view is mapped if >> it has an output assigned. In a zero outputs scenario, >> this isn't really desirable. >> >> This patch introduces a new flag to weston_surface and >> weston_view, which has to be set manually to indicate >> that a surface/view is mapped. >> >> Signed-off-by: Armin Krezović <[email protected]> > > Hi Armin, > > there is a slight problem with the split and ordering in patches 8 - > 11. Patch 8 removes the old conditions, which breaks "everything" and > the follow-up patches fix things up piece by piece. The problem is that > we now have known-broken commits from the start. Those will make > bisecting unrelated issues harder. >
Ugh, that's a valid concern.
> There are two possible solutions:
>
> - split patch 8 to to only add the new fields, and make a new patch as
> the final one in the series that switches the
> weston_{view,surface}_is_mapped() to use the new flags
>
> - squash all patches 8 - 11 into one
>
> Because the changes in patches 9 - 11 are fairly trivial and unlikely
> to break anything in themselves, the patch that switches the
> *_is_mapped() functions will be the one causing the regressions if any.
> Hence it would be also ok to just squash these into one patch. It
> doesn't make too much difference for reviews, and no difference for
> bisecting.
>
I wanted to split the shells stuff mainly because different people work(ed)
on different shells. I like the first approach.
>> ---
>> src/compositor.c | 29 ++++++++++-------------------
>> src/compositor.h | 4 ++++
>> src/data-device.c | 2 ++
>> src/input.c | 2 ++
>> 4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> There is also a more subtle change of semantics in this patch, which
> would be good to underline in the commit message.
>
> Previously when mappedness was determined by outputs, unmapping the
> last view unmapped also the surface, or so I believe. That no longer
> happens, which is actually a good thing. This allows a shell to unmap
> all views without losing the mappedness information of the surface.
>
> A practical example of this is hiding a desktop-shell top-level window.
> When the window is shown again, it should appear on the position where
> it was hidden, but that will not happen if desktop-shell thinks the
> surface is not mapped. Instead, desktop-shell will randomize the window
> position again. I haven't looked if this actually happens or if there
> is code to work around that, but I think the change by this patch is
> for the better.
>
> The mappedness states of a surface and its views are no longer
> implicitly connected.
>
I'm not sure I'm getting all this. We can discuss about it more on
IRC or I can just copy/paste most of the text above :).
>>
>> diff --git a/src/compositor.c b/src/compositor.c
>> index d246046..b25c671 100644
>> --- a/src/compositor.c
>> +++ b/src/compositor.c
>> @@ -1549,19 +1549,13 @@ weston_view_set_mask_infinite(struct weston_view
>> *view)
>> WL_EXPORT bool
>> weston_view_is_mapped(struct weston_view *view)
>> {
>> - if (view->output)
>> - return true;
>> - else
>> - return false;
>> + return view->is_mapped;
>> }
>>
>> WL_EXPORT bool
>> weston_surface_is_mapped(struct weston_surface *surface)
>> {
>> - if (surface->output)
>> - return true;
>> - else
>> - return false;
>> + return surface->is_mapped;
>> }
>>
>> static void
>> @@ -1738,6 +1732,7 @@ weston_view_unmap(struct weston_view *view)
>> weston_view_damage_below(view);
>> view->output = NULL;
>> view->plane = NULL;
>> + view->is_mapped = false;
>> weston_layer_entry_remove(&view->layer_link);
>> wl_list_remove(&view->link);
>> wl_list_init(&view->link);
>
> Looks like weston_view_unmap() has a problem. It won't fix up the input
> device foci unless the surface is not mapped. So even before this
> patch, if a shell unmaps a view that had pointer focus, the pointer
> focus is not removed. The same for touch. But this does not apply to
> kbd focus, because kbd focus is tracked by the surface, not by the view.
>
> Then I wonder if the sloppy handling of pointer focus is actually
> relied on somewhere, or if it's just accidental. Or both.
>
> Giulio, do you have any recommendations on what to do here?
> Since this ties in with the issue below...
>
> Fixing this is not a matter for this patch, though.
>
>> @@ -1769,6 +1764,7 @@ weston_surface_unmap(struct weston_surface *surface)
>>
>> wl_list_for_each(view, &surface->views, surface_link)
>> weston_view_unmap(view);
>> + surface->is_mapped = false;
>> surface->output = NULL;
>
> Because weston_view_unmap() is called first, and surface->is_mapped is
> set only afterwards, the input foci clean-up never runs.
>
> I think surface->is_mapped = false should be before the
> weston_view_unmap(). That way at least weston_surface_unmap() will work
> as expected. Previously, it relied on the last call to
> weston_view_unmap() -> weston_surface_assign_output() to mark the
> surface as not mapped via output assignment, so that the input foci
> clean-up was executed once all views were unmapped.
>
Hm, I was just trying to mimic the behavior of the previous implementation.
Setting output to NULL meant unmapping the surface. Your suggestion makes
sense though.
>> }
>>
>> @@ -2131,6 +2127,7 @@ view_list_add_subsurface_view(struct weston_compositor
>> *compositor,
>>
>> view->parent_view = parent;
>> weston_view_update_transform(view);
>> + view->is_mapped = true;
>
> This looks correct.
>
>>
>> if (wl_list_empty(&sub->surface->subsurface_list)) {
>> wl_list_insert(compositor->view_list.prev, &view->link);
>> @@ -2152,6 +2149,7 @@ view_list_add(struct weston_compositor *compositor,
>> struct weston_subsurface *sub;
>>
>> weston_view_update_transform(view);
>> + view->is_mapped = true;
>
> This I am not so sure about. Isn't it the responsibility of whoever
> puts a view on a layer to set is_mapped to true?
>
> Doing it here might paper over some overlooked places.
>
Again, I was trying to mimic the previous behavior. weston_view_update_transform
assigns an output to the view, and when the output got assigned it was assumed
the view was mapped.
>>
>> if (wl_list_empty(&view->surface->subsurface_list)) {
>> wl_list_insert(compositor->view_list.prev, &view->link);
>> @@ -3244,7 +3242,6 @@ subsurface_get_label(struct weston_surface *surface,
>> char *buf, size_t len)
>> static void
>> subsurface_configure(struct weston_surface *surface, int32_t dx, int32_t dy)
>> {
>> - struct weston_compositor *compositor = surface->compositor;
>> struct weston_view *view;
>>
>> wl_list_for_each(view, &surface->views, surface_link)
>> @@ -3256,8 +3253,9 @@ subsurface_configure(struct weston_surface *surface,
>> int32_t dx, int32_t dy)
>> * mapped, parent is not in a visible layer, so this sub-surface
>> * will not be drawn either.
>> */
>> - if (!weston_surface_is_mapped(surface)) {
>> - struct weston_output *output;
>> +
>> + if (!weston_surface_is_mapped(surface))
>> + surface->is_mapped = true;
>>
>> /* Cannot call weston_view_update_transform(),
>> * because that would call it also for the parent surface,
>> @@ -3265,18 +3263,11 @@ subsurface_configure(struct weston_surface *surface,
>> int32_t dx, int32_t dy)
>> * inconsistent state, where the window could never be
>> * mapped.
>> *
>> - * Instead just assign any output, to make
>> + * Instead just force the is_mapped flag on, to make
>> * weston_surface_is_mapped() return true, so that when the
>> * parent surface does get mapped, this one will get
>> * included, too. See view_list_add().
>> */
>> - assert(!wl_list_empty(&compositor->output_list));
>> - output = container_of(compositor->output_list.next,
>> - struct weston_output, link);
>> -
>> - surface->output = output;
>> - weston_surface_update_output_mask(surface, 1u << output->id);
>> - }
>
> Correct, but I'd still like to keep the braces. The comment block looks
> quite out of place otherwise.
>
OK.
>> }
>>
>> static struct weston_subsurface *
>> diff --git a/src/compositor.h b/src/compositor.h
>> index 9e5155c..8770982 100644
>> --- a/src/compositor.h
>> +++ b/src/compositor.h
>> @@ -964,6 +964,8 @@ struct weston_view {
>>
>> /* Per-surface Presentation feedback flags, controlled by backend. */
>> uint32_t psf_flags;
>> +
>> + bool is_mapped;
>> };
>>
>> struct weston_surface_state {
>> @@ -1082,6 +1084,8 @@ struct weston_surface {
>> const char *role_name;
>>
>> struct weston_timeline_object timeline;
>> +
>> + bool is_mapped;
>> };
>>
>> struct weston_subsurface {
>> diff --git a/src/data-device.c b/src/data-device.c
>> index f04f030..44a08f9 100644
>> --- a/src/data-device.c
>> +++ b/src/data-device.c
>> @@ -421,6 +421,8 @@ drag_surface_configure(struct weston_drag *drag,
>> weston_layer_entry_insert(list, &drag->icon->layer_link);
>> weston_view_update_transform(drag->icon);
>> pixman_region32_clear(&es->pending.input);
>> + es->is_mapped = true;
>> + drag->icon->is_mapped = true;
>
> Looks correct.
>
>> }
>>
>> drag->dx += sx;
>> diff --git a/src/input.c b/src/input.c
>> index 08378d1..5ccc75f 100644
>> --- a/src/input.c
>> +++ b/src/input.c
>> @@ -1950,6 +1950,8 @@ pointer_cursor_surface_configure(struct weston_surface
>> *es,
>>
>> weston_layer_entry_insert(&es->compositor->cursor_layer.view_list,
>> &pointer->sprite->layer_link);
>> weston_view_update_transform(pointer->sprite);
>> + es->is_mapped = true;
>> + pointer->sprite->is_mapped = true;
>> }
>> }
>>
>
> Looks correct.
>
> I didn't yet search for overlooked places, but I should do that once I
> have reviewed the last patches of this series.
>
>
> Thanks,
> pq
>
Thanks for the review.
Armin
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
