Am 08.09.2011 09:08, schrieb Marek Olšák: > 2011/9/7 Roland Scheidegger <srol...@vmware.com>: >> That said I'm not really sure why pipe_sampler_view and pipe_surface >> actually have a context pointer in them, since they are only supposed to >> be used with the context in which they were created I think those >> shouldn't actually exist - surface_destroy and sampler_view_destroy will >> have context as a parameter, and if they aren't shared between contexts >> it's pointless to store the context pointer. Might be a relic from when >> those structs were created/destroyed using screen functions... > > The ctx pointer is there because of pipe_surface_reference and > pipe_sampler_view_reference. When the refcount becomes 0, the > corresponding pipe...reference function uses the ctx pointer to do > ctx->...destroy(ctx, ... > > So that we can destroy objects just by: > pipe_surface_reference(&surface, NULL); > > This ctx pointer also ensures that the destroy function is called with > the right context.
Yes. It's arguable though that these really need refcounting - the state tracker could probably create/destroy them like any other object (e.g. they could follow just the normal create/bind/destroy pattern). Only resources really need refcounting. Even with refcounting you could just pass in the context probably, since the context when creating/destroying them always has to be the same anyway. (pipe_surface though definitely needed refcounting in the past because it was a sharable screen entity once used for things like gl system framebuffers which were not backed by a resource.) It works for now though so I'm not really proposing to change it. Roland _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
