On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 01:08:27PM -0600, Jeremy White wrote: > >> I'm trying to build an 0.12.6 spice server and I'd like to fix this > >> issue, so I can't use this patch as it is. > >> > >> I spent some time trying to identify what change seems to help, and the > >> attached patch seems to solve the problem. > >> > >> I'm hoping that someone smarter than me can kibitz on this patch, and > >> let me know if they think it's basically 'safe' or not. > >> > > > > Yes, it's safe, is always safe to call that function. > > However... this means that probably you are passing a wrong surface_id > > from your software! > > That's good to know, thanks. But for the record, I don't think it's an > incorrect surface_id. That is, the change I made was simply to move the > flush up higher in the function; I did not add any calls. That mirrors > a logic change that was in the relevant patch. > > The issue is that Xspice ends up being a hybrid; some commands go > through the queue and io/port, and some commands are actually done via > direct call. > > So the sequence is: push a create surface message, and then invoke > update_area. The latter is called before the create surface message has > been processed, which causes the problem. So the surface is invalid at > the time of the update call, but if we flush the queue, the surface is > created, and everything works. > > I guess that's a long way of saying that I think my patch is appropriate > for 0.12.6 :-/. Would you mind sending this as a separate patch so that it does not get lost in this thread? Or maybe you have done that already and I missed it? Thanks, Christophe
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel