On 03/02/17 09:10 AM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
We were calling weston_surface::committed on surfaces with
no buffer attached. Stop doing that, since surface::committed
will map the surfaces and put them in a visible layer. That may
not be a problem for a single surface as it wouldn't be visible
anyway because it's got no contents, but it is a problem if the
surface has subsurfaces.
This fixes the subsurface_mapped test, so mark it as expected
to succeed.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=94735
Signed-off-by: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <[email protected]>
---
libweston/compositor.c | 10 +++++++++-
tests/subsurface-shot-test.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/libweston/compositor.c b/libweston/compositor.c
index 81392063..8a018897 100644
--- a/libweston/compositor.c
+++ b/libweston/compositor.c
@@ -1589,6 +1589,12 @@ weston_surface_is_mapped(struct weston_surface *surface)
return surface->is_mapped;
}
+static bool
+weston_surface_has_content(struct weston_surface *surface)
+{
+ return surface->width > 0 && surface->height > 0;
Are these going to be 0 if a NULL buffer is attached to an existing surface?
A quick read has me thinking width_from_buffer and height_from_buffer
are reset on a NULL attach, but width and height only get updated on
commit - so depending on when this function is called it might not
return the expected result.
If that's the intended behaviour, perhaps a comment to avoid misuse in
the future...
+}
+
static void
surface_set_size(struct weston_surface *surface, int32_t width, int32_t height)
{
@@ -2928,7 +2934,9 @@ weston_surface_commit_state(struct weston_surface
*surface,
if (state->newly_attached || state->buffer_viewport.changed) {
weston_surface_update_size(surface);
- if (surface->committed)
+ if (surface->committed &&
+ (state->newly_attached &&
+ weston_surface_has_content(surface)))
surface->committed(surface, state->sx, state->sy);
}
diff --git a/tests/subsurface-shot-test.c b/tests/subsurface-shot-test.c
index e7da1e0e..275d4726 100644
--- a/tests/subsurface-shot-test.c
+++ b/tests/subsurface-shot-test.c
@@ -261,7 +261,7 @@ TEST(subsurface_z_order)
buffer_destroy(bufs[i]);
}
-FAIL_TEST(subsurface_mapped)
+TEST(subsurface_mapped)
{
const char *test_name = get_test_name();
struct client *client;
Why not re-order these commits so the subsurface test is introduced in a
passing state?
Thanks,
Derek
_______________________________________________
wayland-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
