On 08/23/2016 05:40 PM, Emil Velikov wrote:
On 23 August 2016 at 12:26, Tapani Pälli <tapani.pa...@intel.com> wrote:

On 08/23/2016 12:52 PM, Tapani Pälli wrote:

On 08/18/2016 01:28 PM, Emil Velikov wrote:

On 21 June 2016 at 11:33, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote:

On 16 May 2016 at 11:57, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote:

On 16 May 2016 at 11:54, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all,

While looking at the gbm/egl I've noticed a few interesting bits.
 - We do NULL checking for values that are guaranteed by API to be
 - wcore_*_init does not need a return type, plus in some places we
not calling it in the correct time.
 - wcore_*_teardown is a simple wrapper around assert, which (at the
time the function should be called) is too late/not needed.

So this series simplifies these, giving us a nice -350 line count ;-)

The whole thing can be found in

For some reason git send-email seems to be choking on patches 08/13
and 09/13. Please check those out via the above repo or let me know if
you'd prefer them in other format.

I might have gone overboard (too much) folding the error label(s) in
09/13 "core: remove wcore_*_init() return type". I can split those up
if people prefer.

Humble poke.

Patches 1 (cleanup) and 3-7 (do not check null since api_check_entry did
it already):

Reviewed-by: Tapani Pälli <tapani.pa...@intel.com>

(I will check the rest from the repo)

Also R-B to 12 and 13.

Thanks Tapani. Hope we can find someone with commit access to push these.

Question about "core: remove wcore_*_teardown()" patch:

Is it possible that core classes will have allocations or some other stuff
in their constructor that then needs cleanup in dtor in the future? If it
happens then all of this infrastructure needs to be put back .. I'm just
thinking if this is OK from that perspective?

I cannot think of any case that would require us to bring these back since:
 - waffle itself is meant to have/store little to no state (only some
*_platform can take more than 100 bytes) with the memory allocation
done in the platform rather than wcore.
I.e. wcore does not and should not [mc]alloc anything that needs to be freed.
 - the wcore api only 'links' the primitives initially thus there is
nothing that could/should be teardown.

Yeah, I cannot really come up with such case either .. maybe only some debugging/tracing could be hooked there but yeah .. just wanted to check if there is possible 'futureproofing' in place there.

R-B also to following patches:

egl: tweak wegl_platform_init()
wayland: tweak wayland_wrapper_init()

// Tapani
waffle mailing list

Reply via email to