| kenvandine | RAOF, hmm... i'm testing it on mako with silo 0 | 01:32 |
|---|---|---|
| kenvandine | not mir_demo_server | 01:32 |
| RAOF | Hm. | 02:00 |
| RAOF | I don't know what input changes are in silo 0. | 02:01 |
| === chihchun_afk is now known as chihchun | ||
| bschaefer | RAOF, would you know how trunk could possibly mess up reading umockdev recordings? | 02:34 |
| bschaefer | as ... once i merged from trunk the recordings no longer generate events in mir | 02:35 |
| bschaefer | soo either somehow trunk messed up new code you put in or the under the hood mir is different for handling events? | 02:35 |
| === chihchun is now known as chihchun_afk | ||
| RAOF | bschaefer: I don't know. I'll pull your branch and investigate. | 02:51 |
| bschaefer | RAOF, alright, ill spend more time on it tomorrow if you've other things to get done | 02:52 |
| * bschaefer slightly assumes he might have messed up fixing merge conflicts | 02:53 | |
| bschaefer | but i dont think so | 02:53 |
| bschaefer | RAOF, also i dont think we need the mir cookie for the basic surface validation meaning we can reduce a lot of code changing | 02:54 |
| bschaefer | (since a 0 should be a find value). Though i want to check if i even need to edit that make_event to begin with | 02:54 |
| RAOF | Right. You can certainly get part of the way through without actually plumbing in the real cookie. | 02:54 |
| RAOF | It'll just be useless :) | 02:55 |
| bschaefer | yup, i was slightly lost when doing it at first and am trying to refine a lot of my changes | 02:55 |
| bschaefer | mainly wanted to get all touch/keyboard/pointer to get cookies, but really only keyboard events + up/down events *need* | 02:56 |
| bschaefer | cookies | 02:56 |
| RAOF | Right. | 02:58 |
| RAOF | Well, mostly. | 02:59 |
| RAOF | Touch begin/end probably need cookies, too. (As that's how “clicks” happen on touchscreens) | 02:59 |
| bschaefer | well hmm right from what i can tell the validator does a very small touch event | 03:05 |
| bschaefer | only 3 args | 03:05 |
| * bschaefer needs to figure out the best way for that | 03:05 | |
| === chihchun_afk is now known as chihchun | ||
| === chihchun is now known as chihchun_afk | ||
| === chihchun_afk is now known as chihchun | ||
| === chihchun is now known as chihchun_afk | ||
| === chihchun_afk is now known as chihchun | ||
| === chihchun is now known as chihchun_afk | ||
| === chihchun_afk is now known as chihchun | ||
| === chihchun is now known as chihchun_afk | ||
| === chihchun_afk is now known as chihchun | ||
| === chihchun is now known as chihchun_afk | ||
| duflu | greyback: On my way to EOD, but was wondering... Do you have any idea why scrolling with a constant finger touch in Qt feels like it's missing frames? Significantly less smooth than a fling... | 10:05 |
| greyback | duflu: it's something I've also observed, but thus far I've no good explanation | 10:05 |
| duflu | I would have said it's just keeping up with the finger by jumping. But then noticed Android doesn't have the problem and neither to mir-demos | 10:06 |
| duflu | neither do | 10:06 |
| greyback | I investigated if the input events received by the client were smooth - and they are | 10:06 |
| duflu | greyback: I know... we have some roughly equivalent mir-demos and they are smooth | 10:07 |
| greyback | duflu: yeah but I'm testing using unity8 here | 10:07 |
| duflu | greyback: On that note, does the --desktopfile trick still work? | 10:07 |
| greyback | duflu: yep | 10:07 |
| duflu | Hmm, OK. Another day. | 10:08 |
| greyback | I want to improve qtmir's releasing buffer after swap, which might help | 10:08 |
| duflu | greyback: Yeah I've got it "done". Just held up by the related Mir fix waiting to land. Then I need to recombine and retest them | 10:09 |
| greyback | duflu: really? care to share? | 10:09 |
| duflu | greyback: Work in progress, and don't expect to see any benefit without the Mir fix coming in 0.16... https://code.launchpad.net/~vanvugt/qtmir/supersmooth | 10:10 |
| greyback | duflu: ok cool | 10:10 |
| duflu | greyback: Hmm, actually that looks old | 10:12 |
| duflu | I think I had a newer one | 10:12 |
| greyback | well you're doing the right things | 10:13 |
| duflu | greyback: Oh, that is the latest | 10:13 |
| ogra_ | duflu, fyi, i'm running my arale with GPU at full speed (using the sysfs hack from the mail thread) ... it ois a lot smoother and less stuttery ... but i'D guess it also eats about 10% more battery over time | 10:14 |
| ogra_ | (i dont think we have any GPU scaling at all on the other phones) | 10:14 |
| duflu | ogra_: Yeah I noticed raising the minimum frequency helped, but not as much as having the extra cores enabled | 10:14 |
| ogra_ | we need ToyKeeper to measure the different scenarios for us ;) she has accurate power measurement tools | 10:15 |
| greyback | duflu: what mir commit would I need to test? | 10:18 |
| duflu | greyback: The current MP "earlier release" | 10:18 |
| duflu | greyback: https://code.launchpad.net/~vanvugt/mir/earlier-release/+merge/267321 | 10:19 |
| * duflu wanders off | 10:19 | |
| greyback | duflu: thanks! | 10:19 |
| alan_g | alf_: got headspace to discuss the remaining test failure I've got? | 11:35 |
| alf_ | alan_g: sure | 11:35 |
| alan_g | I'm seeing an FD leak in some of the VariousDevices/EventHubDeviceEnumerationTest* tests. Specifically, those that call add_standard_device() | 11:36 |
| alan_g | That allocates FDs in umockdev_testbed_load_ioctl() - which are never released | 11:37 |
| alan_g | But none of this is new code - so how did it ever pass? | 11:37 |
| alf_ | alan_g: Can you point me to a failure backtrace? | 11:38 |
| alan_g | http://paste.ubuntu.com/12117630/ | 11:40 |
| === chihchun_afk is now known as chihchun | ||
| alan_g | alf_: ^ any thoughts? | 11:47 |
| alf_ | alan_g: Yes. I had put an exception for this case in detect_fd_leaks (checking for "g_dbus" in the backtrace), but in the new backtrace there is "bin doc src lib" instead of the g_dbus_* function names | 11:49 |
| alf_ | alan_g: That's a thought, let me confirm this | 11:50 |
| alan_g | alf_: that makes sense. | 11:50 |
| alan_g | (although the backtrace doesn't) | 11:51 |
| alan_g | I guess another exception for "mir_test_framework::UdevEnvironment::add_standard_device" would be specific enough | 11:53 |
| === alan_g is now known as alan_g|lunch | ||
| alf_ | alan_g: So, yes, I remembered that I was getting the g_dbus related errors locally, not in CI (probably because dbus is not running in the CI chroot?). | 12:07 |
| alf_ | alan_g|lunch: ^^ | 12:07 |
| alan_g|lunch | alf_: yep. I've MP'd the above (to see if anything remains that I haven't got locally) | 12:09 |
| mterry | alf_, hello! Thanks for taking over that timeout branch for me. I added a comment in your MP | 12:54 |
| alf_ | mterry: No problem, thanks for the original fix :) | 12:55 |
| alf_ | mterry: Let me try your idea... | 12:59 |
| === alan_g|lunch is now known as alan_g | ||
| alf_ | mterry: Your idea looks good. Would you like to incorporate the tests in your branch (+the max() idea)? | 13:11 |
| mterry | alf_, I'm in a meeting right now, so you can run with it | 13:12 |
| alf_ | mterry: ok | 13:12 |
| alf_ | mterry: Change applied. Thanks! | 13:22 |
| alf_ | mterry: (and tested on arale) | 13:22 |
| mterry | alf_, sweet, I approved the branch from my side. But maybe get a real mir folk to also look at it | 13:22 |
| === dandrader is now known as dandrader|afk | ||
| === chihchun is now known as chihchun_afk | ||
| === dandrader|afk is now known as dandrader | ||
| === ogra_` is now known as ogra_ | ||
| === alan_g is now known as alan_g|EOD | ||
| === dandrader is now known as dandrader|afk | ||
| === dandrader|afk is now known as dandrader | ||
| === ljp is now known as lpotter | ||
| === dandrader is now known as dandrader|afk | ||
| === dandrader|afk is now known as dandrader | ||
| bschaefer | RAOF, for when you get on, thanks for fixing that test (had no idea i had to include that...) | 21:56 |
| bschaefer | now for the basic_suface validator | 21:56 |
| bschaefer | i would love to remove the need for the cookie factory, the only issue is the default event that is needed | 21:56 |
| bschaefer | if theres no prev events | 21:56 |
| bschaefer | now... i've clue when a default event would ever happen, or if its save enough to ignore the mac for a default event that we needed to generate | 21:57 |
| bschaefer | (im assuming yes its ok to ignore a mac for it since its just a bare bone vent) | 21:57 |
| bschaefer | evet* | 21:57 |
| bschaefer | soo now im starting to think the default touch event will have 0 pointer count meaning it will not have a down/up action | 21:59 |
| bschaefer | meaning we can remove the need to generate a valid mac for that | 21:59 |
| * bschaefer double checks the default value for a make_event for a touch event | 21:59 | |
| bschaefer | hmm and now looking at that, the pointer_count variable for the new motion event is not being defined and everything is memset to 0 | 22:01 |
| bschaefer | soo yay no need for a cookie there since there will never be a up/down event or a default event if theres no prev touch event | 22:01 |
| bschaefer | RAOF, IGNORE MY PING | 22:01 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!