From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:43749) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RrrbH-0004qW-An for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 08:48:57 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RrrbG-0003qA-5G for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 08:48:51 -0500 Received: from goliath.siemens.de ([192.35.17.28]:29990) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RrrbF-0003mv-Qh for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 08:48:50 -0500 Message-ID: <4F269FBE.9040307@siemens.com> Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:48:46 +0100 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1354816477.730358.1327923250151.JavaMail.open-xchange@email.1und1.de> <4F268471.6040803@siemens.com> <1412799439.18464.1327929457713.JavaMail.open-xchange@email.1und1.de> In-Reply-To: <1412799439.18464.1327929457713.JavaMail.open-xchange@email.1und1.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] git bisect results List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Erik Rull Cc: "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" On 2012-01-30 14:17, Erik Rull wrote: > > > > On January 30, 2012 at 12:52 PM Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> On 2012-01-30 12:34, Erik Rull wrote: >>> Hi Jan, >>> >>> I'm sorry, but this does not solve my issue. I applied the patch and >>> crosschecked that the resulting file looks fine. >>> >>> The final function looks like: >>> >>> static void sdl_grab_start(void) >>> { >>> /* >>> * If the application is not active, do not try to enter grab state. > This >>> * prevents 'SDL_WM_GrabInput(SDL_GRAB_ON)' from blocking all the >>> * application (SDL bug). >>> */ >>> if (!(SDL_GetAppState() & SDL_APPINPUTFOCUS)) { >>> return; >>> } >>> if (guest_cursor) { >>> SDL_SetCursor(guest_sprite); >>> if (!kbd_mouse_is_absolute() && !absolute_enabled) >>> SDL_WarpMouse(guest_x, guest_y); >>> } else >>> sdl_hide_cursor(); >>> SDL_WM_GrabInput(SDL_GRAB_ON); >>> gui_grab = 1; >>> sdl_update_caption(); >>> } >> >> That makes no sense as gui_grab must be 1 now. Please retry your >> previous instrumentation. >> >> Thanks, >> Jan >> > > You're right. So I added the instrumentation again. > > Still looks strange. > > So I added into the sdl_grab_start() a printf. > Wow - a lot of output! > This pointed me to all other sdl_grab_start() calls (and in additon to that > all sdl_grab_end() calls). > > And here are the results of the qemu voting :-) > > I already assigned a usable name to the printf output that is directly one > line above the corresponding sdl_grab_*() call, so you should be able to > find this easily in your code as well. > > The huge number of recurring printf's are: > > sdl_grab_start() called from absolute_mouse_grab() > sdl_grab_end() called from handle_activation() > sdl_grab_start() called from absolute_mouse_grab() > sdl_grab_end() called from handle_activation() > sdl_grab_start() called from absolute_mouse_grab() > sdl_grab_end() called from handle_activation() > sdl_grab_start() called from absolute_mouse_grab() > sdl_grab_end() called from handle_activation() > sdl_grab_start() called from absolute_mouse_grab() > sdl_grab_end() called from handle_activation() > sdl_grab_start() called from absolute_mouse_grab() > sdl_grab_end() called from handle_activation() > sdl_grab_start() called from absolute_mouse_grab() > sdl_grab_end() called from handle_activation() > > Any idea how to proceed? > > Maybe the first two if-statements in handle_activation() cause the problem? > Because there the two given functions are called in sequence if both > if-clauses are valid one after the other. Maybe the first one sets the > state so that the second if is valid, too. Maybe a simple else if solves > the issue? ev->active.gain makes both clauses mutually exclusive - unless someone messes with the memory of the event object. > I'm not familiar with the variables that are checked here, so > it's just a guess. So handle_activation() is called directly after absolute_mouse_grab(), and the reported event contains state = SDL_APPINPUTFOCUS gain = 0 (please validate!) That would mean we are constantly losing the input focus again after trying to gain it via SDL_WM_GrabInput. Weird. What's the call chain for absolute_mouse_grab()? Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux