On Fri, 2013-09-20 at 15:21 +0300, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-09-20 at 17:27 +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> > This will be needed if the implementation data stores pointers to
> > additional data that needs to be freed as well.
> > ---
> > src/pulsecore/device-port.c | 3 +++
> > src/pulsecore/device-port.h | 3 +++
> > 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/src/pulsecore/device-port.c b/src/pulsecore/device-port.c
> > index 0b65d5c..ac2c95e 100644
> > --- a/src/pulsecore/device-port.c
> > +++ b/src/pulsecore/device-port.c
> > @@ -94,6 +94,9 @@ static void device_port_free(pa_object *o) {
> > pa_assert(p);
> > pa_assert(pa_device_port_refcnt(p) == 0);
> >
> > + if (p->impl_free)
> > + p->impl_free(p);
> > +
> > if (p->proplist)
> > pa_proplist_free(p->proplist);
> >
> > diff --git a/src/pulsecore/device-port.h b/src/pulsecore/device-port.h
> > index b10d554..b5e80a5 100644
> > --- a/src/pulsecore/device-port.h
> > +++ b/src/pulsecore/device-port.h
> > @@ -54,6 +54,9 @@ struct pa_device_port {
> > pa_direction_t direction;
> > int64_t latency_offset;
> >
> > + /* Free the extra implementation specific data. Called before other members are freed. */
> > + void (*impl_free)(pa_device_port *port);
> > +
> > /* .. followed by some implementation specific data */
> > };
> >
>
> It's sad that this is needed, but ack. (I have probably said this
> earlier: I'd like ports to not require refcounting, in which case they
> would probably be always owned by cards.)
In which case the card would have to have a way to check what kind of
implementation-specific data is there and call the appropriate free
function. Doable, but not the prettiest, imo.
-- Arun
