Yeah, The synchronous APIs are not the nicest ones, I have to agree. However, we should keep the behavior and emulate it. But put a big comment there why we do such busy waiting.
And yes, the SysApps APIs will not be synchronous. BR; Sakari On 9/18/13 12:27 AM, "Kenneth Rohde Christiansen" <kenneth.christian...@gmail.com> wrote: >I kind of believe that we need to implement the API the way it is >designed; even if that makes no sense at all. At least it would be >good to propose a better Power/Idle API soon as it should be quite >easy to implement. > >Kenneth > >On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 9:51 PM, Menard, Alexis <alexis.men...@intel.com> >wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I was fixing the remaining tests from the tct suite related to Power >>API and I'm left with two failures which I'd like to discuss. >> >> Consider the Power API : >> >>https://developer.tizen.org/help/topic/org.tizen.web.device.apireference/ >>tizen/power.html >> >> and these methods : >> >> void turnScreenOn () >> void turnScreenOff () >> setScreenBrightness() >> >> The two tests are failing because they're testing the API basically >>that way : >> >> turnScreenOn() >> assert_true(isScreenOn()) >> >> Problem is that the underlaying C API we call (or even any other Power >>management API I believe) is not a synchronous function call. It takes >>few ms to change the brightness or to wake up/switch off the screen also >>because you may need to change the power state and so on. >> >> I believe these TCT tests are covering the behaviour for the old WRT. >>If we want to be compliant we need to behave the same and therefore >>emulate the synchronous behaviour (btw I hope the SysApps API are better >>because OMG these are terrible APIs). >> >> As we use the same C API as the ones in the old WRT I was curious on >>how the people behind the old WRT solved it and here is the magic piece >>of code : >> >> void PowerManager::setScreenState(bool onoff){ >> int ret = 0; >> if( onoff ) >> ret = pm_change_state(LCD_NORMAL); >> else >> ret = pm_change_state(LCD_OFF); >> if( ret<0 ){ >> LoggerE("Platform error while changing screen state %d", ret); >> throw UnknownException("Platform error while changing screen state"); >> } >> >> int timeout=100; >> while(timeout--){ >> if( isScreenOn() == onoff ) >> break; >> usleep(100000); >> } >> } >> >> So should we emulate the sync behaviour? If so, I believe that we can >>do better than the piece of code above (by blocking the return of the >>fct while we wait the state change callback from the platform) -> better >>suggestion? >> >> Software Engineer @ >> Intel Open Source Technology Center >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Crosswalk-dev mailing list >> Crosswalk-dev@lists.crosswalk-project.org >> https://lists.crosswalk-project.org/mailman/listinfo/crosswalk-dev > > > >-- >Kenneth Rohde Christiansen >Senior Engineer, WebKit, Qt, EFL >Phone +45 4294 9458 / E-mail kenneth at webkit.org > >﹆﹆﹆ >_______________________________________________ >Crosswalk-dev mailing list >Crosswalk-dev@lists.crosswalk-project.org >https://lists.crosswalk-project.org/mailman/listinfo/crosswalk-dev _______________________________________________ Crosswalk-dev mailing list Crosswalk-dev@lists.crosswalk-project.org https://lists.crosswalk-project.org/mailman/listinfo/crosswalk-dev
