On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 15:03:59 -0700, Aaron Plattner <[email protected]> wrote:
> Fine, but will you be willing to move this call to the drivers that need it > when we have a real sync extension? I don't see the point -- it doesn't change anything visible to clients or drivers, other than to eliminate the tiny window where some damage events might be delivered in a slightly different order, aside from the bug present within the Damage code. Also, there's no way, given the currents server API, to have drivers make this call -- they can't know which of the many damage objects within the server are created by the damage extension. I guess I'm curious how these other drivers manage to use the composite extension today; are they just forcing cross-queue synchronization at every flush call in the X server? In any case, here's what I think we should ensure that any release on either 1.9 or 1.10 branch doesn't contain the compiz bug. For the 1.9 branch, unless the fix for the Damage code is trivial, I'd recommend reverting this patch there. For the 1.10 master branch, I'd strongly prefer to see the Damage bug get fixed before the 1.10 release. It's likely to be causing other problems within the server in places which use the post-op path. If no such fix is forthcoming before the 1.10 release, we should revert this patch as the known bugs it causes are worse than the known bugs it fixes. -- [email protected]
pgpeJqPJUbQBT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
