>
> At the moment, we'll unconditionally release the guest QXL resources in
> red_put_drawable() even if red_get_drawable() failed and did not
> initialize drawable->release_info_ext properly.
> This commit checks the QXLReleaseInfo in release_info_ext is non-0
> before attempting to release it.
> ---
> server/red-parse-qxl.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/server/red-parse-qxl.c b/server/red-parse-qxl.c
> index dc99d1f30..80746ecbb 100644
> --- a/server/red-parse-qxl.c
> +++ b/server/red-parse-qxl.c
> @@ -1504,7 +1504,9 @@ void red_drawable_unref(RedDrawable *red_drawable)
> if (--red_drawable->refs) {
> return;
> }
> - red_qxl_release_resource(red_drawable->qxl,
> red_drawable->release_info_ext);
> + if (red_drawable->release_info_ext.info != NULL) {
> + red_qxl_release_resource(red_drawable->qxl,
> red_drawable->release_info_ext);
> + }
> red_put_drawable(red_drawable);
> g_free(red_drawable);
> }
Would not be better not calling red_qxl_release_resource from red_put_drawable and check
red->qxl instead of red_drawable->release_info_ext.info != NULL like all other calls?
Looks like after these patches there are 3 different style of APIs to get/put commands
from QXL, is confusing (not that previously was totally clear, I agree adding QXLInstance
argument but there are still some inconsistencies).
Frediano
_______________________________________________
Spice-devel mailing list
Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel