On Thu, 29 Nov 2018 11:35:29 +0200 Alexandros Frantzis <[email protected]> wrote:
> Graphics APIs are expected to use this protocol under the hood, and > since there can only be one user of explicit synchronization per > surface, warn about using the protocol directly in such cases. > > Signed-off-by: Alexandros Frantzis <[email protected]> > --- > .../linux-explicit-synchronization-unstable-v1.xml | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git > a/unstable/linux-explicit-synchronization/linux-explicit-synchronization-unstable-v1.xml > > b/unstable/linux-explicit-synchronization/linux-explicit-synchronization-unstable-v1.xml > index 5809b42..6d5783d 100644 > --- > a/unstable/linux-explicit-synchronization/linux-explicit-synchronization-unstable-v1.xml > +++ > b/unstable/linux-explicit-synchronization/linux-explicit-synchronization-unstable-v1.xml > @@ -66,6 +66,12 @@ > > If the given wl_surface already has an explicit synchronization > object > associated, the synchronization_exists protocol error is raised. > + > + Graphics APIs, like EGL or Vulkan, that manage the buffer queue and > + commits of a wl_surface themselves, are likely to be using this > + extension internally. If a client is using such an API for a > + wl_surface, it should not directly use this extension on that > surface, > + to avoid raising a synchronization_exists protocol error. > </description> > > <arg name="id" type="new_id" Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <[email protected]> Thanks, pq
pgpz9aC8f88zM.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
