On 04/07/2016 08:50 PM, Ian Romanick wrote:
On 04/07/2016 10:57 AM, Stéphane Marchesin wrote:
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Miklós Máté <mtm...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 04/07/2016 12:40 PM, Stéphane Marchesin wrote:
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 3:37 AM, Miklós Máté <mtm...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 04/07/2016 12:25 PM, Stéphane Marchesin wrote:
On Apr 7, 2016 02:27, "Michel Dänzer" <mic...@daenzer.net> wrote:
On 07.04.2016 18:01, Marek Olšák wrote:
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Ian Romanick <i...@freedesktop.org>
wrote:
Why would you do that? I've NAKed this patch several times.
You NAKed the previous version of the patch, not this one. I guess
that means NAK for this one too.
I'd be interested in a specific justification for NAKing this version.
Seems to me like this might be the best that can be done.
We asked ourselves the same question.
It is the best that can be done to fix glx 1.2 for sure. But it will
break
glx 1.3, so for example it will break chrome (I have a vested interest
here
:).
So what we figured out is, if we have to choose between the old and new
api,
why break the newer (and arguably better) one? Instead we should consider
the old one deprecated/legacy and move on.
Stéphane
How does this break glX 1.3, and how does this break Chrome?
I don't have the source here, so it's off the top of my head. But
isn't this going to start leaking dri drawables if you constantly
makecurrent?
No, it doesn't leak anything in makecurrent.
By itself this is ok (because they all point to the same
buffer) but there are pieces of glx 1.2 (like swapbuffers) that
iterate over all the dri drawables and then they become really slow.
Stéphane
The problem with this patch, as I was informed, is that people don't call
glXDestroyPixmap (or glXDestroyGLXPixmap) before calling XFreePixmap, and
Yes, because those don't exist in glx 1.2.
glXDestroyGLXPixmap has existed since GLX 1.0. My impression was that
the lack of glXDestroyWindow was the problem.
My goal is to avoid leaks in long-running applications that lots and
lots of people care about. Chrome is (the?) one such application that I
know of from the top of my head. My recollection is that this kind of
leak would cause Chrome to leak every time a tab is closed. I know that
Stéphane is a busy guy, so I was trying to keep the discussion more
generic so that he wouldn't have to step in. :) Now that you're here...
If Stéphane and Miklós can come up with a solution that makes you both
happy, I won't get in the way. If there is still some potential for a
leak, I'd like to have at least a plan (or a fallback via environment
variable) to get non-leaking behavior... in case we find another app
with this problem. I don't want to be left holding the bag if Miklós
wanders back to more interesting projects. Right?
Well, if Chrome properly uses glXDestroyWindow, then this patch doesn't
introduce
a resource leak there. The leak only affects applications that render to
multiple
windows without using glx 1.3.
MM
thus the resources allocated by glx are leaked (until the process exits). In
current Mesa, the dri drawable associated with the glx object only lives
while the glx object is current to a context, which prevents the above
problem in a crude way.
Yes, and you end up accumulating lots of dri drawables which are all
iterated at swapbuffers time. That makes swapbuffers really slow
eventually.
Stéphane
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
