Hi,
Instead of this patch series and the previous self_bitmap patch, I
think we should do the following:
Both GLZDrawable and Drawable share references to RedDrawable and
self_bitmap, and self_bitmap life time is equal to RedDrawable's one.
So we need to have a new type which warps RedDrawable
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:57:05AM +0300, Yonit Halperin wrote:
Hi,
Instead of this patch series and the previous self_bitmap patch, I think
we should do the following:
Both GLZDrawable and Drawable share references to RedDrawable and
self_bitmap, and self_bitmap life time is equal to
On 05/15/2012 11:57 AM, Yonit Halperin wrote:
Hi,
Instead of this patch series and the previous self_bitmap patch, I
think we should do the following:
Both GLZDrawable and Drawable share references to RedDrawable and
self_bitmap, and self_bitmap life time is equal to RedDrawable's one.
So we
On 05/15/2012 12:06 PM, Alon Levy wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:57:05AM +0300, Yonit Halperin wrote:
Hi,
Instead of this patch series and the previous self_bitmap patch, I think
we should do the following:
Both GLZDrawable and Drawable share references to RedDrawable and
self_bitmap, and
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 12:27:24PM +0300, Yonit Halperin wrote:
On 05/15/2012 12:06 PM, Alon Levy wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:57:05AM +0300, Yonit Halperin wrote:
Hi,
Instead of this patch series and the previous self_bitmap patch, I think
we should do the following:
Both GLZDrawable
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 12:18:44PM +0300, Uri Lublin wrote:
On 05/15/2012 11:57 AM, Yonit Halperin wrote:
Hi,
Instead of this patch series and the previous self_bitmap patch, I think
we should do the following:
Both GLZDrawable and Drawable share references to RedDrawable and
self_bitmap,
After the previous patch moving self_bitmap freeing inside red_drawable
ref count, we have a possible self_bitmap leak:
red_process_commands
red_get_drawable | red_drawable #1, red_drawable-self_bitmap == 1
red_process_drawable | rd #2, d #1, d-self_bitmap != NULL
release_drawable | rd #1,