On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:10:26PM -0500, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > Hey, > > > > On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 05:31:43PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > > Before the signal is acutally emitted, the channel may be > > > > 'actually' > > > > > released. Similarly to g_signal_emit, take a reference before yielding > > > to main context. > > > > I would drop the "similarly to g_signal_emit" as your purpose is most > > likely different. The ref is needed here as the signal emission is > > async, so code can run before the signal emission, but g_signal_emit is > > synchronous. > > > > I assume the scenario you want to protect against is > > - (coroutine context)g_coroutine_signal_emit is called > > - the signal emission is scheduled in an idle with g_idle_add > > - coroutine_yield() is called > > - (main context)code runs which drops the last ref on the channel > > - (main context)idle runs and tries to emit the signal > > > > > > Patch looks good if this is the correct scenario. > > Yes, I maintain "similarly", because we want to maintain object alive > during g_coroutine_signal_emit(). I think it is thus appropriate here. g_signal_emit and g_coroutine_signal_emit want to keep the object alive for very different reasons, so I would not say "similarly". The only similarity (apart from the name) is that both use g_object_ref() to ensure the object does not die during some work they do, there are probably a lot of functions doing that. Feel free to add the scenario to the log for future readers. Christophe
Attachment:
pgpK9Q0ke8yqu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel