[PATCH weston] RDP compositor: make the seat dynamic and don't destroy it on removal

[Derek Foreman]

On 25/09/15 02:46 PM, Hardening wrote:
> Le 25/09/2015 19:15, Derek Foreman a écrit :
>> On 25/09/15 08:19 AM, Hardening wrote:
>>> Le 25/09/2015 11:31, Pekka Paalanen a écrit :
>>>> On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 23:40:26 +0200
>>>> David FORT <rdp.effort at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This patch makes the seat dynamic and leak it on purpose during seat removal to
>>>>> prevent the ghost object case.
>>>>> ---
> 
> [...]
> 
>>>
>>> Hello Pekka,
>>> you're right I've not elaborated much.
>>>
>>> So the general problem was that wl_seat doesn't have a release request,
>>> so we can't track the usage of a wl_seat by wayland clients. And as we
>>> can't track the usage, we can't release it safely or we take the risk
>>> that clients could address a released object. In the current situation
>>> we can't safely release a seat object.
>>
>> Should we move forward with your patch to add seat release protocol first?
>>
>> Does that change this implementation at all?
> 
> Yeah this could be an idea. Once the "release seat patch" is passed, the
> goal would be to not leak the seat at all, so the present patch would be
> useless.

It looked like it needed only trivial changes to land (some version
bumps...)

I don't know how to handle old clients (or buggy new ones) that don't
bother sending the seat release request though...

>>
>>> So in my patch I'm mallocating a seat (not having it static with the RDP
>>> context), an I took the parts of weston_seat_release() that only do
>>> things internally to weston (so that I release as much as I can).
>>>
>>>
> 
> [...]
>>>
>>>
>>> Anyway without the patch, valgrind complains during seat releasing (for
>>> example when a RDP peer disconnects).
>>
>> Sigh.  There's a lot of multi-seat related problems in the
>> text-backend/input-method bits.  I've got a bunch of patches I need to
>> sort through and post. :/
>>
>> I don't think you've added this problem, I think it's already there (and
>> I may have fixed it already...)
>>
> 
> I can test with these patches to see if things get better, any reference ?

Ouch, turns out I haven't rebased it lately and it's pretty messed up
right now, I'll try to get it back into shape early next week.

> 
> Best regards.
>