On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 01:34:09PM +0200, Yonit Halperin wrote:
> On 09/08/2011 02:17 AM, Alon Levy wrote:
> Hi,
> I think this patch is sufficient for the 0.8 branch (+ the comments
> bellow + locks (for several display channels threads)).
> However for master, due to the red_channel refactoring I
On 09/08/2011 02:17 AM, Alon Levy wrote:
Hi,
I think this patch is sufficient for the 0.8 branch (+ the comments
bellow + locks (for several display channels threads)).
However for master, due to the red_channel refactoring I think we should
have a more general dispatcher. It would be nice if (1
On Thu, 08.09.11 02:24, Marc-André Lureau (marcandre.lur...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Lennart, I wonder what today you think about it, if there is any
> drawback or improvements. ie would you use it again?
I'd always go for socketpair() unless you have a really really good
reason to go for atomic op st
Hi
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Alon Levy wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 11:26:00AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> Hi,
>
> ok. I guess I'll add an assert (not ASSERT). I'm still looking at the
> pulseaudio IPC - it looks
> like asyncmsgq is good for what we need - it's meant for multiple w
On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 02:24:32AM +0200, Marc-André Lureau wrote:
> Hi Alon,
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 1:17 AM, Alon Levy wrote:
> > ---
> > server/Makefile.am | 2 +
> > server/main_dispatcher.c | 132
> > ++
> > server/main_dispatcher.h
On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 11:26:00AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 09/08/2011 11:18 AM, Alon Levy wrote:
> >On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 10:58:41AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>On 09/08/2011 09:31 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> >>>Hi,
> >>>
> >simple object system, not unions).
Hi,
On 09/08/2011 11:18 AM, Alon Levy wrote:
On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 10:58:41AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 09/08/2011 09:31 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
Hi,
simple object system, not unions). Just an idea, could be changed
later perhaps. socketpair is probably fine.
First of all I see
On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 10:58:41AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 09/08/2011 09:31 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >>>simple object system, not unions). Just an idea, could be changed
> >>>later perhaps. socketpair is probably fine.
> >>
> >>First of all I see I forgot to add a mut
On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 09:31:33AM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> >>simple object system, not unions). Just an idea, could be changed
> >>later perhaps. socketpair is probably fine.
> >
> >First of all I see I forgot to add a mutex, since I said "any non main
> >thread", right
> >now we
Hi,
On 09/08/2011 09:31 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
Hi,
simple object system, not unions). Just an idea, could be changed
later perhaps. socketpair is probably fine.
First of all I see I forgot to add a mutex, since I said "any non main thread",
right
now we only have one, so no need to lock,
Hi,
simple object system, not unions). Just an idea, could be changed
later perhaps. socketpair is probably fine.
First of all I see I forgot to add a mutex, since I said "any non main thread",
right
now we only have one, so no need to lock, but the idea is that it can also be
called from
On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 02:24:32AM +0200, Marc-André Lureau wrote:
> Hi Alon,
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 1:17 AM, Alon Levy wrote:
> > ---
> > server/Makefile.am | 2 +
> > server/main_dispatcher.c | 132
> > ++
> > server/main_dispatcher.h
Hi Alon,
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 1:17 AM, Alon Levy wrote:
> ---
> server/Makefile.am | 2 +
> server/main_dispatcher.c | 132
> ++
> server/main_dispatcher.h | 9 +++
> server/reds.c | 5 ++-
> 4 files changed, 147 insertion
---
server/Makefile.am |2 +
server/main_dispatcher.c | 132 ++
server/main_dispatcher.h |9 +++
server/reds.c|5 ++-
4 files changed, 147 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 server/main_dispatcher.c
create m
14 matches
Mail list logo
