On 01/12/2013 05:49 PM, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > On Sat, 2013-01-12 at 17:36 +0100, David Henningsson wrote: >> On 01/12/2013 04:46 PM, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: >>> Good point. So, there are two bugs: m->busy isn't initialized properly, >>> and change_cb() is sometimes called even when m->busy doesn't change. >> >> Well, I figured that it would be - maybe mostly theoretical here, but >> still - the case that given three apps A, B, and C with descending >> priorities, that B want to know of a change from A to C so that it could >> grab the sound card now that a lower priority app has it. > > C can't get the device from A, since C has lower priority. Given the only known current implementation there are only transitions to and from null anyway, so busy to busy transitions don't even exist. >>> How to proceed? If I was to decide, we'd take my patch for fixing the >>> redundant change_cb() calls, and adapt your patch to fix the >>> initialization (is_really_busy() should be called in rm_watch(), instead >>> of using it in filter_handler() to work around the initialization bug). >>> If that sounds good, do you wish to send an updated patch, or do you >>> prefer me to do it? >> >> I don't have time/priority to fix the initialization (I believe it >> requires a call to org.freedesktop's GetNameOwner function?), so if you >> do the initialization within a few days time I'm okay with that. >> Otherwise I suggest we push my patch as it is. > > I'll write the patch today. Regarding pushing, I didn't push my patch, > because I thought that we should get updates from upstream reserve.git. > I hope Lennart will push these patches soon. Sure, but if reserve.git is buggy and upstream (Hi Lennart, that's you!) unresponsive, which seems to be the case if you sent your previous patch to him and he never responded, the bug should be fixed as close to the source as possible, which then becomes the PulseAudio repository. -- David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd. https://launchpad.net/~diwic
