Use strong references to gbm_device in Surface/BufferObject
#25
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Eliminates `DeviceDestroyedError` from the API, which makes the crate easier to use.
ids1024
added a commit
to ids1024/smithay
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 21, 2024
ids1024
changed the title
gbm_device in Surface/BufferObjectgbm_device in Surface/BufferObject
|
Rebased, and updated Smithay to use this in Smithay/smithay#1594 for testing. This doesn't change much in Smithay, but is a bit neater. |
Drakulix
reviewed
Nov 22, 2024
This appears to serve no purpose when we already have a strong reference to the device. And it's nice to get rid of the `Result<Result<..>, ..>`
Now this only has one variant, there's no need for an enum.
Drakulix
approved these changes
Dec 2, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Using a strong reference is the most obvious way to address Smithay/smithay#1102. And getting rid of
DeviceDestroyedErrormakes the API a fair bit cleaner.Though
Device.fdwill also need to be reference counted for this to fix the issue here. Presumably. And this will need testing. Leaving as a draft at the moment.Any reason not to do this, or why it may cause problems? I guess
Devicewill requireT: Sync...