[Spice-devel] [RFC v4 18/62] server/red_channel: introduce pipes functions

[Marc-André Lureau]

On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Alon Levy <alevy at redhat.com> wrote:
> Introduce functions to add (via producer method) the same item to multiple
> pipes, all for the same channel.
>
> Note: Right now there is only a single channel, but the next patches will do the
> per-channel breakdown to channel and channel_client before actually introducing
> a ring in RedChannel, this makes it easier to make smaller changes - the
> channel->rcc link will exist until removed in the ring introducing patch.
> ---
>  server/red_channel.c |   51 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  server/red_channel.h |   12 ++++++++++-
>  2 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/server/red_channel.c b/server/red_channel.c
> index aff99ed..7e1edbe 100644
> --- a/server/red_channel.c
> +++ b/server/red_channel.c
> @@ -1051,4 +1051,55 @@ void red_client_set_main(RedClient *client, MainChannelClient *mcc) {
>     client->mcc = mcc;
>  }
>
> +/*
> + * Functions to push the same item to multiple pipes.
> + */
> +
> +/*
> + * TODO: after convinced of correctness, add paths for single client
> + * that avoid the whole loop. perhaps even have a function pointer table
> + * later.
> + * TODO - inline? macro? right now this is the simplest from code amount
> + */
> +
> +typedef void (*rcc_item_t)(RedChannelClient *rcc, PipeItem *item);
> +typedef int (*rcc_item_cond_t)(RedChannelClient *rcc, PipeItem *item);
>
> +void __red_channel_pipes_create_batch(RedChannel *channel,
> +                                new_pipe_item_t creator, void *data,
> +                                rcc_item_t visitor)

The "__" prefix is not necessary imho, however a static modifier would be nice.

As you know already, I am not fond of the "visitor" name, since here
it's just a callback, and not a real visitor "object" (ie with a state
and multiple visit() methods etc..).

> +{
> +    RedChannelClient *rcc;
> +    PipeItem *item;
> +    int num = 0;
> +
> +    if (!(rcc = channel->rcc)) {
> +        return;
> +    }
> +    item = (*creator)(rcc, data, num++);
> +    if (visitor) {
> +        (*visitor)(rcc, item);
> +    }
> +}
> +
> +void red_channel_pipes_new_add_push(RedChannel *channel,
> +                              new_pipe_item_t creator, void *data)
> +{
> +    __red_channel_pipes_create_batch(channel, creator, data,
> +                                     red_channel_client_pipe_add);
> +    red_channel_push(channel);
> +}
> +
> +void red_channel_pipes_new_add(RedChannel *channel, new_pipe_item_t creator, void *data)
> +{
> +    __red_channel_pipes_create_batch(channel, creator, data,
> +                                     red_channel_client_pipe_add);
> +}
> +
> +// despite the name, this should push (TODO: match function to name)

yeah... that could be fixed easily instead of left as a TODO. No?

Imho, the responsibility to call push() should be left to the caller instead...

> +void red_channel_pipes_new_add_tail(RedChannel *channel, new_pipe_item_t creator, void *data)
> +{
> +    __red_channel_pipes_create_batch(channel, creator, data,
> +                                     red_channel_client_pipe_add_tail_no_push);
> +    red_channel_push(channel);
> +}

> diff --git a/server/red_channel.h b/server/red_channel.h
> index 877c567..15d70b6 100644
> --- a/server/red_channel.h
> +++ b/server/red_channel.h
> @@ -271,6 +271,16 @@ void red_channel_client_set_message_serial(RedChannelClient *channel, uint64_t);
>  void red_channel_client_begin_send_message(RedChannelClient *rcc);
>
>  void red_channel_pipe_item_init(RedChannel *channel, PipeItem *item, int type);
> +
> +// TODO: add back the channel_pipe_add functionality - by adding reference counting
> +// to the PipeItem.
> +
> +// helper to push a new item to all channels
> +typedef PipeItem *(*new_pipe_item_t)(RedChannelClient *rcc, void *data, int num);

What is "num" doing?

Would it be more future proof to take PipeItem * as argument, that can
be either referenced or copied by the various pipes?
(see general comment in 00/62 reply about sharing PipeItem for various pipes)

> +void red_channel_pipes_new_add_push(RedChannel *channel, new_pipe_item_t creator, void *data);
> +void red_channel_pipes_new_add(RedChannel *channel, new_pipe_item_t creator, void *data);
> +void red_channel_pipes_new_add_tail(RedChannel *channel, new_pipe_item_t creator, void *data);
> +
>  void red_channel_client_pipe_add_push(RedChannelClient *rcc, PipeItem *item);
>  void red_channel_client_pipe_add(RedChannelClient *rcc, PipeItem *item);
>  void red_channel_client_pipe_add_after(RedChannelClient *rcc, PipeItem *item, PipeItem *pos);
> @@ -374,4 +384,4 @@ void red_client_destroy(RedClient *client);
>  void red_client_set_main(RedClient *client, MainChannelClient *mcc);
>  MainChannelClient *red_client_get_main(RedClient *client);
>
> -#endif
> +#endif
> \ No newline at end of file
> --
> 1.7.4.4
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spice-devel mailing list
> Spice-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
>



-- 
Marc-André Lureau