On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 08:02 -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 10:44:54 -0400, Adam Jackson <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > Given that, I think we have to make it so damage actions against a
> > Damage that has lost its Drawable simply fizzle, and continue to leave
> > cleanup to the clients.  Compiled, not tested:
> 
> Yeah, that sounds right to me. Retains the current semantics, but
> removes the pointer to freed memory.

Hmph.  In trying to build a testcase for this I think I've discovered
that we _do_ already gc Damages when their drawables die; it's just
harder to see because it's done as a callback from miext/damage's
wrappers around Destroy{Pixmap,Window}.

Which, I suspect, means my original patch was simply correct.  But I'll
keep digging.

- ajax

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

_______________________________________________
[email protected]: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel

Reply via email to