From: Miguel F. <mi...@ce...> - 2001-12-16 12:14:04
|
Guenter Bartsch wrote: > Hi Harm, > > On Sat, 15 Dec 2001, Harm van der Heijden wrote: > > >> I didn't follow the thread about Xv events a while back. Can >> anybody give me a summary of the result? Perhaps it's related to >> this problem. >> > > sounds really like it. Siggi reported to me about a laptop where Xv > was worse than XShm as well. > > Miguel, I think you were following that Xv thread? Yes, and there seems to be a problem here (Xv). I don't know if this is our fault or Xserver's though. I don't have any conclusion about the problem but looks like somehow we get false xshm completion events. Our code should handle if some event get lost (after 10 tries he give up on waiting event) but not extra events. this may cause another frame being send before the previous completed. Do anybody knows Xv (and shm) better to take a look at that? I would try something but only if i could reproduce the problem. not reproducible and not fully understandable makes things harder... regards, Miguel |