Hide internals (drop the need to include windowstr.h), make it typesafe
as well as the naming easier to understand.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
XID = 0 already is used as sign for error in several places,
so let's use that here, too.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
The old PCCONS driver only seems to be used on minimal install disks and
cannot coexist with newer ones (at least that's the feedback I've gotten
from BSD community), so there's probably no practical use case for
supporting it in Xorg anymore.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Now that the name clash on GC type between Xserver and xlib has been fixed,
there's no need to do the special renaming hack anymore.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Both xlib as well as the Xserver use the same identifier "GC" for
different types. While on xlib it's just the numerical ID of a GC,
the xserver defines a struct for it by the same name. This is this
ugly and needs ridiculous hacks for Xserver code that needs xlib.
Easy to solve by just renaming the GC typedef to GCRec (consistent
with how we're naming other structs) and replacing GC* by GCPtr.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
The function actually operates on ClientRec, so we can pass it in
directly, so it doesn't need to fetch it from clients[] array itself.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Not used by anybody, neither Xserver nor drivers, so no need to
keep it around any longer.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Using calloc() instead of malloc() as preventive measure, so there
never can be any hidden bugs or leaks due uninitialized memory.
The extra cost of using this compiler intrinsic should be practically
impossible to measure - in many cases a good compiler can even deduce
if certain areas really don't need to be zero'd (because they're written
to right after allocation) and create more efficient machine code.
The code pathes in question are pretty cold anyways, so it's probably
not worth even thinking about potential extra runtime costs.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Using calloc() instead of malloc() as preventive measure, so there
never can be any hidden bugs or leaks due uninitialized memory.
The extra cost of using this compiler intrinsic should be practically
impossible to measure - in many cases a good compiler can even deduce
if certain areas really don't need to be zero'd (because they're written
to right after allocation) and create more efficient machine code.
The code pathes in question are pretty cold anyways, so it's probably
not worth even thinking about potential extra runtime costs.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Using calloc() instead of malloc() as preventive measure, so there
never can be any hidden bugs or leaks due uninitialized memory.
The extra cost of using this compiler intrinsic should be practically
impossible to measure - in many cases a good compiler can even deduce
if certain areas really don't need to be zero'd (because they're written
to right after allocation) and create more efficient machine code.
The code pathes in question are pretty cold anyways, so it's probably
not worth even thinking about potential extra runtime costs.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Using calloc() instead of malloc() as preventive measure, so there
never can be any hidden bugs or leaks due uninitialized memory.
The extra cost of using this compiler intrinsic should be practically
impossible to measure - in many cases a good compiler can even deduce
if certain areas really don't need to be zero'd (because they're written
to right after allocation) and create more efficient machine code.
The code pathes in question are pretty cold anyways, so it's probably
not worth even thinking about potential extra runtime costs.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Using calloc() instead of malloc() as preventive measure, so there
never can be any hidden bugs or leaks due uninitialized memory.
The extra cost of using this compiler intrinsic should be practically
impossible to measure - in many cases a good compiler can even deduce
if certain areas really don't need to be zero'd (because they're written
to right after allocation) and create more efficient machine code.
The code pathes in question are pretty cold anyways, so it's probably
not worth even thinking about potential extra runtime costs.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Using calloc() instead of malloc() as preventive measure, so there
never can be any hidden bugs or leaks due uninitialized memory.
The extra cost of using this compiler intrinsic should be practically
impossible to measure - in many cases a good compiler can even deduce
if certain areas really don't need to be zero'd (because they're written
to right after allocation) and create more efficient machine code.
The code pathes in question are pretty cold anyways, so it's probably
not worth even thinking about potential extra runtime costs.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Not used anywhere, neither Xserver nor drivers, so no need to keep it anymore.
According to git history, it had been introduced introduced in 2003 (*1),
but never called (inside the Xserver) - unclear whether it ever had been
actually used somewhere.
*1) 9508a382f8
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
There doesn't seem to be any driver for these cards anymore,
so no need for trying to probe them anymore.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
There doesn't seem to be any sungt driver anymore, so no need for
trying to probe those cards any longer.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
There doesn't seem to be any suncg12 driver anymore, so no need for
trying to probe those cards any longer.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
There doesn't seem to be any suncg8 driver anymore, so no need for
trying to probe those cards any longer.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
There doesn't seem to be any suncg4 driver anymore, so no need for
trying to probe those cards any longer.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
There doesn't seem to be any suncg2 driver anymore, no need for trying
to probe those cards any longer.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
There doesn't seem to be any sunbw2 driver anymore, so no need for trying
to probe those cards any longer.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
It's always enabled for very long time now (at least since meson transition),
there doesn't seem to be any need to ever disable it again. So we can reduce
code complexity by removing all the ifdef's.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new PostCreateScreenResources screen hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Right now, extensions that need to be called after the CreateScreenResources
proc had been run, must wrap the screen proc vector directly (all of them
forming kind of daisy chain), and so - when called - temporarily restore the
previous one, call it, wrap again, and if the call was successful finally
doing it's own stuff. (same is done for many other procs)
While that approach is looking nice and elegant on the drawing board, it's
complicated, dangerous like a chainsaw and makes debugging hard, leading to
pretty blurred API borders.
Instead introducing a simple approach for letting extension hook into a
post-CreateScreenResources callback list safely, w/o having to care much
about side effects with the call chain. Extensions now can simply register
their business logic and get called back - w/o ever having to mess with the
ScreenRec's internal structures.
Note that these hooks are executed *AFTER* the original CreateScreenResources()
proc had been called SUCCESSFULLY (returned TRUE), so callees can rely on
the DDX/driver had already done it's job.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new screen close notify hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new screen close notify hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new screen close notify hook instead.
This one doesn't look so trivial at first glance, but I've checked that
other functions called by xf86CrtcCloseScreen() just free'ing up some
memory and removing the CRTCs from some lists - thus a change in
execution order really shouldn't matter at all.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new screen close notify hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new screen close notify hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new screen close notify hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new screen close notify hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new screen close notify hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new screen close notify hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new screen close notify hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new screen close notify hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new screen close notify hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Right now, extension specific actions on screen closing implemented by wrapping
the ScreenRec's PositionWindow() proc pointer: the extensions are storing the
original pointer in their private data and putting in their own one. On each
call, their proc restores the original one, calls it, and switches back again.
When multiple extensions doing so, they're forming a kind of daisy chain.
(the same is done for lots of other procs)
While that approach is looking nice and elegant on the drawing board, it's
complicated, dangerous like a chainsaw and makes debugging hard, leading to
pretty blurred API borders.
This commit introduces a simple approach for letting extension hook into the
screen closing path safely, w/o having to care much about side effects with
the call chain. Extensions now can simply register their hook proc (and an
opaque pointer) and get called back - w/o ever having to mess with the
ScreenRec's internal structures. These hooks are called before the original
vector (usually handled by DDX/screen driver directly) is called.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new window destructor hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new window destructor hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new window destructor hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new window destructor hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
xwin relies on mi_priv.h being included indirectly, thus depending
on exact include within other header files. This can easily break if
something in other headers slightly changes.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
The symbol isn't set anywhere, and git history didn't show anything
were it ever had been set, thus no need to keep this.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
No need for complicated wrapping/unwrapping: it's always just
miCreateResources() anyway - so we can call it directly.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
No need to wrap CloseScreen proc vector, we can call KdCloseScreen() from
KdXVCloseScreen() directly.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
No need to wrap CloseScreen proc vector, we can call fbCloseScreen() from
KdCloseScreen() directly.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
No need for complicated wrapping/unwrapping: it's always just
miCreateResources() anyway - so we can call it directly.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
No need for complicated wrapping/unwrapping: it's always just
miCreateResources() anyway - so we can call it directly.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
This wrapping function for Screen->ResizeWindow() is does nothing more than
just call the original functions. So no need to keep wrapping it at all.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
This proc vector is optional (callers check for non-null) and neither fb nor
mi set it, so we can just assign our function directly. No need for wrapping.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
This proc vector is optional (callers check for non-null) and neither fb nor
mi set it, so we can just assign our function directly. No need for wrapping.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
This wrapping function for Screen->CopyWindow() is does nothing more than
just call the original functions. So no need to keep wrapping it at all.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Both engines, GDI as well as DirectDraw, using the same screen init finish function,
so no need to keep indirection via per-engine callback pointer.
The winFinishScreenInitFB() can also be made static now.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
It does nothing more than just calling the original/wrapped function,
so we don't need that at all.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
It does nothing more than just calling the original/wrapped function,
so we don't need that at all.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
No need for complicated wrapping/unwrapping: it's always just
miCreateResources() anyway - so we can call it directly.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Not used anywhere, neither internal nor external.
(BTW, those defines are only used within xf86-video-fbdev, so they maybe
could be moved over there.)
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Not used anywhere, neither internal nor external (drivers), so no need
to keep it any longer.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Not used anywhere, neither internal nor external (drivers), so no need
to keep it any longer.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Not used anywhere, neither internal nor external (drivers), so no need
to keep it any longer.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Not used anywhere, neither internal nor external (drivers), so no need
to keep it any longer.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Not used anywhere, neither internal nor external (drivers), so no need
to keep it any longer.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Not used by any external consumers, only within the same source file,
so can become static.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
This header has now become obsolete. There're also no external consumers
(drivers, etc) left, so it now finally can be dropped entirely.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Even if those situations shouldn't practically happen, it's better to have
some sanity checks just in case.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
It's safer not relying on all ScreenProc's actually filled.
../dix/events.c: In function ‘CheckPhysLimits’:
../dix/events.c:780:14: warning: dereference of NULL ‘pScreen’ [CWE-476] [-Wanalyzer-null-dereference]
780 | (*pScreen->SetCursorPosition)
| ~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
The pointer to the window properties is currently inside the WindowOptional
structure, which may or may not exist at any given time. Thus, before accessing
those fields, at least need to check whether it exists, potentially need to
create it first.
Since a pointer is small (in relation to WindowRec) and windows having properties
is a pretty common, we can make our life much simpler here by moving the pointer
directly into WindowRec, so we don't need extra WindowOptionalRec allocation.
This also fixes an analyzer warning on potential NULL dereference issue:
| ../dix/property.c: In function ‘dixChangeWindowProperty’:
|../dix/property.c:343:37: warning: dereference of NULL ‘*pWin.optional’ [CWE-476] [-Wanalyzer-null-dereference]
| 343 | pProp->next = pWin->optional->userProps;
| | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Be more cautious on possible NULL pointers or not yet registered
devPrivates. Better a gracefully fail instead of hard segfault.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Even though it *should* never be actually hit, it's still safer
to check for NULL instead of letting us crash with segfault.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Even though it's unlikely ever getting it, still safer to have some
extra checks / asserts than unexpected segfault.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Safer (and easier to understand) if we look at the result pointer
instead of the counter for testing whether device wasn't found.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult