[oops, forgot to cc the list as well in my reply]

On 8 March 2016 at 13:06, Olivier Fourdan <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi
>
> On 8 March 2016 at 12:59, Daniel Stone <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 7 March 2016 at 17:45, Olivier Fourdan <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Key repeat is handled by the X server, but input events need to be
>> > processed and forwarded by the Wayland compositor first.
>> >
>> > Make sure the Wayland compositor is actually processing events, to
>> > avoid repeating keys in xwayland while the Wayland compositor cannot
>> > deal with input events for whatever reason, thus not dispatching key
>> > release events, leading to fictious repeat keys while the use has
>> > already released the key.
>>
>> I worry about the potential for deadlock here: what happens if the
>> compositor is blocked on a roundtrip to the X server (which can easily
>> happen with Mutter I believe), but the server processes the key repeat
>> timer before the client request? At that point, no-one can make
>> progress ...
>>
>
>
> ​The key repeat is simply discarded, ie no (fake, repeated) key press
> event will be emitted but the X server is not blocked and still process
> other events, so I am not sure how we could end up in a deadlock. Unless I
> don't understand what you mean.
>
> BTW, this patch is simply a proof of concept, I'll post a slightly less
> "hack-y-ish" patch is a short while.
>
> Cheers,
> Olivier
>
_______________________________________________
[email protected]: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel

Reply via email to