On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 18:09 +0200, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 18:11 +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote: > > On 2 April 2012 17:31, Tanu Kaskinen <tanu.kaskinen at digia.com> wrote: > > > Coverity warned about an unchecked pa_write() return value, > > > which is fixed in the last patch of this series. While > > > figuring out what pa_mainloop_wakeup() was supposed to do > > > and how it was called, I noticed some other issues related > > > to that function. > > > > > > There's some discussion (so far monologue only) on the > > > mailing list: > > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/pulseaudio-discuss/2012-March/013164.html > > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/pulseaudio-discuss/2012-April/013175.html > > > > > > Tanu Kaskinen (5): > > > mainloop: Change wakeup_requested type from pa_bool_t to pa_atomic_t. > > > mainloop: Remove useless pa_mainloop_wakeup() calls. > > > mainloop: Remove redundant wakeup_pipe validity checks. > > > mainloop: Write to the wakeup pipe unconditionally when waking up the > > > mainloop. > > > mainloop: Check pa_write() return value. > > > > Ack on all, but could you push 1 and 4 to fix bug #56735 now and the > > rest after 3.0? > > 1 and 4 pushed to master, the rest are waiting in my "next" branch. It turned out that the "remove useless pa_mainloop_wakeup() calls" patch was a bad idea. The wakeups are not useless. The rationale for claiming that they are useless was that they are called from functions that are not thread-safe. However, when using pa_threaded_mainloop, it's common to access the underlying pa_mainloop object from multiple threads. It's not accessed concurrently, so it's safe, but it requires calling pa_mainloop_wakeup() in many places. I've removed that patch from the "next" branch. -- Tanu
