On 27 April 2018 at 14:16, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 12 March 2018 at 09:14, Gerd Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> Add support for cursor dmabufs. qemu has to render the cursor for
>> that, so in case a cursor is present qemu allocates a new dmabuf, blits
>> the scanout, blends in the pointer and passes on the new dmabuf to
>> spice-server. Without cursor qemu continues to simply pass on the
>> scanout dmabuf as-is.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gerd Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lur...@redhat.com>
>> Message-id: 20180308090618.30147-4-kra...@redhat.com
>> +static void qemu_spice_gl_cursor_position(DisplayChangeListener *dcl,
>> + uint32_t pos_x, uint32_t pos_y)
>> +{
>> + SimpleSpiceDisplay *ssd = container_of(dcl, SimpleSpiceDisplay, dcl);
>> +
>> + ssd->ptr_x = pos_x;
>> + ssd->ptr_y = pos_y;
>
> Is it safe to write to these fields of ssd without holding
> ssd->lock ? Coverity thinks it might not be (CID 1390631) because
> we do take the lock to update them in display_mouse_set().
Ping for opinions on this coverity issue?
thanks
-- PMM
