Hi,
On 3 January 2018 at 22:25, Derek Foreman <der...@osg.samsung.com> wrote:
> On 2017-12-28 01:53 PM, Daniel Stone wrote:
>> @@ -434,10 +499,14 @@ proxy_destroy(struct wl_proxy *proxy)
>> if (proxy->flags & WL_PROXY_FLAG_ID_DELETED) {
>> wl_map_remove(&proxy->display->objects, proxy->object.id);
>> } else if (proxy->object.id < WL_SERVER_ID_START) {
>> + struct wl_zombie *zombie = prepare_zombie(proxy);
>
>
> I think we discussed this on irc and I said this patch was ok, but I missed
> this change...
>
> prepare_zombie(proxy) should probably only be called from wl_proxy_create
> and create_for_id - calling it in the destroy path results in a malloc()
> call during deleting.
>
> Should the malloc() fail and we can't actually allocate the zombie at during
> deletion we're going to have a problem.
Hm, yes. On the other hand, if we can't allocate the zombie object,
then we probably won't be able to allocate the closure when
demarshaling the events either?
The other thing I started doing before this move, was just allocating
zombie on the end of the wl_proxy so we only have one allocation and
free. It does mean that proxies will consume more memory when undead,
I suppose. I don't have strong feelings either way, so am happy to
with any of those three ...
> Otherwise, I like the way you've split up the series, and I've reviewed your
> new patches.
Thanks a lot! I'll leave them sit for a couple more days to see if
anyone spots anything and then just push them if not.
Cheers,
Daniel
_______________________________________________
wayland-devel mailing list
wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
