On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 09:40 +0200, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 03:33:03PM -0500, Jonathon Jongsma wrote:
> > I don't know if something got messed up during a rebase (that doesn't appear
> > to
> > be the case), but I don't really understand this commit or how the patch
> > relates
> > to the commit log...
> >
>
> Fairly cryptic indeed, and it does not seem to have been impacted by
> rebases... :)
> The shortlog should be s/PipeItem/RingItem, and then what it means is
> that with this change, the layout of the VDIReadBuf struct makes it
> close enough to RedPipeItem (the refcounted one), that we can replace
> it.
> Layout becomes:
>
> typedef struct VDIReadBuf {
> RingItem link;
> uint32_t refs;
> ....
> }
>
>
> which is close enough to
>
> typedef struct PipeItem {
> RingItem link;
> int type;
> } PipeItem;
>
>
> typedef struct {
> PipeItem parent;
>
> /* private */
> int refcount;
>
> GDestroyNotify free_func;
> } RedPipeItem;
>
> So we can abuse the RedPipeItem stuff to get refcounting there. Given
> the subsequent "HACK" commit, maybe this is not such a good idea, and
> these VDIReadBuf changes could be dropped if they don't bring other
> benefits some place else.
>
> Christophe
OK, that makes sense now. However, I don't really see any benefit in this as a
separate intermediate commit. I'd prefer to squash it with the next one. What do
you think?
_______________________________________________
Spice-devel mailing list
Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel