Am 09.01.2014 09:29, schrieb Wenchao Xia:
> 于 2014/1/8 17:08, Peter Lieven 写道:
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Lieven <p...@kamp.de>
>> ---
>>   ui/vnc.c |    9 +++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/ui/vnc.c b/ui/vnc.c
>> index da552fe..a742d32 100644
>> --- a/ui/vnc.c
>> +++ b/ui/vnc.c
>> @@ -3170,7 +3170,9 @@ void vnc_display_open(DisplayState *ds, const char 
>> *display, Error **errp)
>>               acl = 1;
>>   #endif
>>           } else if (strncmp(options, "lossy", 5) == 0) {
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_VNC_JPEG
>>               vs->lossy = true;
>> +#endif
>>           } else if (strncmp(options, "non-adaptive", 12) == 0) {
>>               vs->non_adaptive = true;
>>           } else if (strncmp(options, "share=", 6) == 0) {
>> @@ -3187,6 +3189,13 @@ void vnc_display_open(DisplayState *ds, const char 
>> *display, Error **errp)
>>           }
>>       }
>>
>> +    /* adaptive updates are only used with tight encoding and
>> +     * if lossy updates are enabled so we can disable all the
>> +     * calculations otherwise */
>> +    if (!vs->lossy) {
>> +        vs->non_adaptive = true;
>> +    }
>> +
>   The code seems: if vs->loosy == false, then vs->non_adaptive = true,
> translate as: if loosy update is not used, then don't do adaptive
> update., which doesn't conform with the comments. I am not sure if this
> is on expectation.
It don't see the logic break. The option means non_adaptive, not adaptive.

I write "adaptive updates are only used ... with lossy updates...". Which
is the same as "without lossy updates we don't need adaptive updates".

Peter

>
>
>>   #ifdef CONFIG_VNC_TLS
>>       if (acl && x509 && vs->tls.x509verify) {
>>           if (!(vs->tls.acl = qemu_acl_init("vnc.x509dname"))) {
>>


Reply via email to