On 2012-01-30 14:17, Erik Rull wrote:
>
>
>
> On January 30, 2012 at 12:52 PM Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@siemens.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2012-01-30 12:34, Erik Rull wrote:
>>> Hi Jan,
>>>
>>> I'm sorry, but this does not solve my issue. I applied the patch and
>>> crosschecked that the resulting file looks fine.
>>>
>>> The final function looks like:
>>>
>>> static void sdl_grab_start(void)
>>> {
>>> /*
>>> * If the application is not active, do not try to enter grab state.
> This
>>> * prevents 'SDL_WM_GrabInput(SDL_GRAB_ON)' from blocking all the
>>> * application (SDL bug).
>>> */
>>> if (!(SDL_GetAppState() & SDL_APPINPUTFOCUS)) {
>>> return;
>>> }
>>> if (guest_cursor) {
>>> SDL_SetCursor(guest_sprite);
>>> if (!kbd_mouse_is_absolute() && !absolute_enabled)
>>> SDL_WarpMouse(guest_x, guest_y);
>>> } else
>>> sdl_hide_cursor();
>>> SDL_WM_GrabInput(SDL_GRAB_ON);
>>> gui_grab = 1;
>>> sdl_update_caption();
>>> }
>>
>> That makes no sense as gui_grab must be 1 now. Please retry your
>> previous instrumentation.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jan
>>
>
> You're right. So I added the instrumentation again.
>
> Still looks strange.
>
> So I added into the sdl_grab_start() a printf.
> Wow - a lot of output!
> This pointed me to all other sdl_grab_start() calls (and in additon to that
> all sdl_grab_end() calls).
>
> And here are the results of the qemu voting :-)
>
> I already assigned a usable name to the printf output that is directly one
> line above the corresponding sdl_grab_*() call, so you should be able to
> find this easily in your code as well.
>
> The huge number of recurring printf's are:
>
> sdl_grab_start() called from absolute_mouse_grab()
> sdl_grab_end() called from handle_activation()
> sdl_grab_start() called from absolute_mouse_grab()
> sdl_grab_end() called from handle_activation()
> sdl_grab_start() called from absolute_mouse_grab()
> sdl_grab_end() called from handle_activation()
> sdl_grab_start() called from absolute_mouse_grab()
> sdl_grab_end() called from handle_activation()
> sdl_grab_start() called from absolute_mouse_grab()
> sdl_grab_end() called from handle_activation()
> sdl_grab_start() called from absolute_mouse_grab()
> sdl_grab_end() called from handle_activation()
> sdl_grab_start() called from absolute_mouse_grab()
> sdl_grab_end() called from handle_activation()
>
> Any idea how to proceed?
>
> Maybe the first two if-statements in handle_activation() cause the problem?
> Because there the two given functions are called in sequence if both
> if-clauses are valid one after the other. Maybe the first one sets the
> state so that the second if is valid, too. Maybe a simple else if solves
> the issue?
ev->active.gain makes both clauses mutually exclusive - unless someone
messes with the memory of the event object.
> I'm not familiar with the variables that are checked here, so
> it's just a guess.
So handle_activation() is called directly after absolute_mouse_grab(),
and the reported event contains
state = SDL_APPINPUTFOCUS
gain = 0
(please validate!)
That would mean we are constantly losing the input focus again after
trying to gain it via SDL_WM_GrabInput. Weird.
What's the call chain for absolute_mouse_grab()?
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
