On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:13:19AM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > Hi, > > >>worker call. We can add a I/O command to ask qxl to push the > >>release queue head to the release ring. > > > >So you suggest to replace QXL_IO_UPDATE_MEM with what, two io commands > >instead > >of using the val parameter? > > I'd like to (a) avoid updating the libspice-server API if possible > and (b) have one I/O command for each logical step. So going into > S3 could look like this: > > (0) stop putting new commands into the rings > (1) QXL_IO_NOTIFY_CMD > (2) QXL_IO_NOTIFY_CURSOR > qxl calls notify(), to make the worker thread empty the command > rings before it processes the next dispatcher request. > (3) QXl_IO_FLUSH_SURFACES (to be implemented) > qxl calls stop()+start(), spice-server renders all surfaces, > thereby flushing state to device memory. > (4) QXL_IO_DESTROY_ALL_SURFACES > zap surfaces > (5) QXL_IO_FLUSH_RELEASE (to be implemented) > push release queue head into the release ring, so the guest > will see it and can release everything. > > (1)+(2)+(4) exist already. > (3)+(5) can be done without libspice-server changes. > > Looks workable?
yeah. Yonit? > > cheers, > Gerd > >
