On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 07:47:24PM +0200, Ville Syrjala wrote:
> From: Ville Syrjälä
>
> Our current global state handling is pretty ad-hoc. Let's try to
> make it better by imitating the standard drm core private object
> approach.
>
> The reason why we don't want to directly use the private ob
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 07:00:27PM +, Souza, Jose wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-01-20 at 19:47 +0200, Ville Syrjala wrote:
> > From: Ville Syrjälä
> >
> > Our current global state handling is pretty ad-hoc. Let's try to
> > make it better by imitating the standard drm core private object
> > approach
On Mon, 2020-01-20 at 19:47 +0200, Ville Syrjala wrote:
> From: Ville Syrjälä
>
> Our current global state handling is pretty ad-hoc. Let's try to
> make it better by imitating the standard drm core private object
> approach.
>
> The reason why we don't want to directly use the private objects
>
From: Ville Syrjälä
Our current global state handling is pretty ad-hoc. Let's try to
make it better by imitating the standard drm core private object
approach.
The reason why we don't want to directly use the private objects
is locking; Each private object has its own lock so if we
introduce any
