Simplify writing reply payload into just one block.
This also makes further simplifications by subsequent patches easier.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Simplify reply buffer in SELinuxSendItemsToClient() by putting it on stack.
No need to go through heap and free it later, if the compiler can do all
the work for us.
This also allows further generalizations of reply sending code by upcoming
commits.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Move extra complexity out of the dispatch functions, so they're
really just switch/case statements calling the actual handler procs.
Preparation for further steps.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
These dispatcher functions are much more complex than they're usually are
(just switch/case statement). Bring them in line with the standard scheme
used in the Xserver, so further steps become easier.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Collect up the puzzle piezes of the reply payload into to a temporary struct,
so we can send it as one block. This allows for further simplifications by
subsequent commits.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Collect up the puzzle piezes of the reply payload into to a temporary struct,
so we can send it as one block. This allows for further simplifications by
subsequent commits.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
The payload lengths is already known, so we can easily collect the data
in a stack buffer and only need one WriteToClient() operation.
This also clears the road for further simplification/unification of the
reply sending code, coming with follow-up commits.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Simplify sending by collecting in a local scoped buffer, so only one
WriteToClient() call is needed. This also makes further simplifications
by upcoming patches easier.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
The way it's currently done, indirectly via macros calling dedicated
functions, is unnecessarily complicated. Simply inline it, just like
(almost) all the other extensions are doing it.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
The ProcVidModeGetAllModeLines() is a bit complicated, because reply structs
differ depending the active protocol version. In order to make it easier to
understand and allow further simplification of the request/reply marshalling
(see ticket #1701), splitting the two protocol versions into separate functions.
Also collecting the whole payload in a stack buffer (size is already known
anyways), in order to save arbirary number of individual WriteToClient() calls,
but send out the whole reply in one pass, which in turn allows further
simplifications in the sending path.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Collect up the puzzle piezes of the reply payload into to a temporary struct,
so we can send it as one block. This allows for further simplifications by
subsequent commits.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
We can simply call SwapLongs() before writing out the CARD32 arrays.
No need using for complicated call back logic.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Semantically these are separate values in each branch any only used there,
so it's a bit more clean to move the declaration into the branches.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
The WriteSwappedDataToClient() already checks whether client is swapped
and directly calls WriteToClient() if it's not.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Coherently moving all reply struct decls and assignments into static
initialization right at declaration, just before it is getting byte-
swapped and sent out. Zero-assignments can be dropped here, since the
compiler automatically initializes all other fields to zero.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Some requests using different structs dependending on which protocol version
(v1 vs. v2) had been selected. That's is handled by coverting v1 structs into v2,
before proceeding with the actual handling.
The code flow of this is very complex and hard to understand. Cleaning this up
in several smaller steps, that are easier to digest.
This part moves the request payload structs (or pointers to them) into the
per-version branches. Within each branch following our usual scheme for
extension request handlers (eg. using the REQUEST*() macros and having a
pointer named `stuff` to the current request struct)
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Some requests using different structs dependending on which protocol version
(v1 vs. v2) had been selected. That's is handled by coverting v1 structs into v2,
before proceeding with the actual handling.
The code flow of this is very complex and hard to understand. Cleaning this up
in several smaller steps, that are easier to digest.
This part is splitting the huge request handlers into upper and lower half,
where the upper is doing the version check and converting v1 requests into v2,
while the lower one is doing the actual request processing, operating on the
struct pointer passed in from the upper one, instead of the client struct's
request buffer.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Some requests using different structs dependending on which protocol version
(v1 vs. v2) had been selected. That's is handled by coverting v1 structs into v2,
before proceeding with the actual handling.
The code flow of this is very complex and hard to understand. Cleaning this up
in several smaller steps, that are easier to digest.
This moving the request size check into the if-version-X branches, to make it
some bit easier to undertand.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
These dispatcher functions are much more complex than they're usually are
(just switch/case statement). Bring them in line with the standard scheme
used in the Xserver, so further steps become easier.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
When using static struct initialization, fields not explicitly
stated are automatically zero.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
In order to allow simplifying the reply send path, collect the reply
fragments into one buffer, instead of arbitrary number of WriteToClient()
calls. This also makes it much easier for potentially new purely packet-based
transports which (eg. binder) that would need their own stream parsing logic.
This xres function is an exceptionally hard case, since payload is constructed
step by step, and it's size only known when finished. The current way of the
fragment handling still has lots of room for improvement (eg. using very small
number of allocations), but leaving this for later exercise.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Collect the few bits in a local array, so one WriteToClient() call is
sufficient. That's also easing further simplifications in upcoming commits.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Collect the few bits in a local array, so one WriteToClient() call is
sufficient. That's also easing further simplifications in upcoming commits.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Instead of having the request handler ask for fd's one by one, just read them
all into a little array in ClientRec struct. And also automatically clean up
after request had been handled.
Request handlers need to set the entries to -1 if they shouldn't be closed
automatically.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
* use static initialization where possible
* put the lists into one one block, so they can be written in one pass
* simplify size computations
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
The dispatcher functions are much more complex than they're usually are
(just switch/case statement). Bring them in line with the standard scheme
used in the Xserver, so further steps become easier.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Only key difference that calloc(), in contrast to rellocarray(),
is zero-initializing. The overhead is hard to measure on today's
machines, and it's safer programming practise to always allocate
zero-initialized, so one can't forget to do it explicitly.
Cocci rule:
@@
expression COUNT;
expression LEN;
@@
- xallocarray(COUNT,LEN)
+ calloc(COUNT,LEN)
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
* use their actual path instead of relying this to be in compiler's
include path list.
* no need to do it only conditionally, no #ifdef needed
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult