Hey Marc-André,
On 7/24/2024 3:37 AM, Marc-André Lureau wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 2:05 AM <dongwon.kim@intel.com
> <mailto:dongwon.kim@intel.com>> wrote:
>
> From: Dongwon Kim <dongwon.kim@intel.com <mailto:dongwon.kim@intel.com>>
>
> Sync object itself is never used as is so can be removed
> from QemuDmaBuf struct. So now sync is only temporarily needed
> when creating fence for the object which means what was done in
> egl_dmabuf_create_sync can now be a part of egl_dmabuf_create_fence
> function. And egl_dmabuf_create_fence returns fence_fd so the
> better function name will be egl_dmabuf_create_fence_fd.
>
> v3: create fence only if current QemuDmaBuf->fence_fd = -1
> to make sure there is no fence currently bound to the
> QemuDmaBuf
>
>
> Why not check it from egl_dmabuf_create_fence_fd() ? calling the
> function twice can still potentially leak.
It is called from only two locations in gtk-egl.c and gtk-gl-draw.c
and dmabuf->fence_fd == -1 is checked beforehand so I thought it's
not needed but I think your point is the completeness of the function
itself. Do you think we can do assert 'dmabuf->fence_fd >= 0'?
>
> Also, please gather the v1/v2/v3/... summary on the cover letter.
Sure
>
> thanks
>
>
> Dongwon Kim (2):
> ui/egl-helpers: Consolidates create-sync and create-fence
> ui/dmabuf: Remove 'sync' from QemuDmaBuf struct
>
> include/ui/dmabuf.h | 2 --
> include/ui/egl-helpers.h | 3 +--
> ui/dmabuf.c | 14 --------------
> ui/egl-helpers.c | 24 +++++++++---------------
> ui/gtk-egl.c | 17 ++++-------------
> ui/gtk-gl-area.c | 12 +++---------
> 6 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.43.0
>
>
>
>
> --
> Marc-André Lureau