It is not necessary check the ivi-id of pregiven objects (layer or
surface). Traversing the list of all objects is sure to find the exact
same pointer we start with, bugs aside.
The controller modules are responsible for providing valid pointers. We
cannot protect from invalid pointers anyway.
Signed-off-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
[Pekka: fix subject, add commit message]
Signed-off-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
It is not necessary check the ivi-id of pregiven objects (layer or
surface). Traversing the list of all objects is sure to find the exact
same pointer we start with, bugs aside.
The controller modules are responsible for providing valid pointers. We
cannot protect from invalid pointers anyway.
Signed-off-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
[Pekka: commit message]
Signed-off-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
It is not necessary check the ivi-id of pregiven objects (layer or
surface). Traversing the list of all objects is sure to find the exact
same pointer we start with, bugs aside.
The controller modules are responsible for providing valid pointers. We
cannot protect from invalid pointers anyway.
Signed-off-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
[Pekka: commit message]
Signed-off-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
It is not necessary check the ivi-id of pregiven objects (layer or
surface). Traversing the list of all objects is sure to find the exact
same pointer we start with, bugs aside.
The controller modules are responsible for providing valid pointers. We
cannot protect from invalid pointers anyway.
Signed-off-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
[Pekka: commit message]
Signed-off-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
It is not necessary check the ivi-id of pregiven objects (layer or
surface). Traversing the list of all objects is sure to find the exact
same pointer we start with, bugs aside.
The controller modules are responsible for providing valid pointers. We
cannot protect from invalid pointers anyway.
Signed-off-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
[Pekka: commit message]
Signed-off-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
This new header encapsulates the API that ivi-layout offers to
ivi-shell.c to call.
ivi-shell.c no longer uses ivi-layout-private.h. This limits the
ivi-layout internal structures to just ivi-layout code.
Signed-off-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
Now that ivi-layout calls directly into ivi-shell.c, this signal is no
longer used. Remove it.
Signed-off-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
For some reason, it seems that ivi-layout.c has tried hard to avoid
calling directly into ivi-shell.c. This means there is a jump through
hoops just to get the configure event sent to the clients. Ivi-shell
registers a listener for a ivi-layout signal for sending the event.
Instead, let ivi-layout.c call directly into ivi-shell.c, and expose a
function to send out the configure events. This reduces some confusion
on who calls what.
The main idea though is that this makes ivi-shell.c not depend on struct
ivi_layout_surface fields directly anymore. In following patches,
ivi_layout_surface can be made opaque for ivi-shell.c.
Signed-off-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
The content observer notification struct and its
set API (ivi_layout_surface_set_content_observer)
are removed. Because they are unused.
Signed-off-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
If surface transitions are not removed when surface is being removed, it
can lead to crash later when transition will finish, as it will try to
reference already freed memory.
This change exposes function that can remove all existing transitions
for given surface and it is being called during surface cleanup.
Signed-off-by: Mateusz Polrola <mateuszx.potrola@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
Reviewed-by: Bryce Harrington <bryce@osg.samsung.com>
Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
The warning of ivisurface reassign can be removed. It is ok to reassign
a surface to a layer it is already on.
The warning started to show up during normal operations since patch
"hmi-controller: remove duplicate commit_changes in random mode".
Signed-off-by: Wataru Natsume <WATARU_NATSUME@xddp.denso.co.jp>
[Pekka: rewrote commit message, removed unneeded comments.]
Signed-off-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
update_opacity is only called when a ivi-surface is visible. But the
previous code also checks event masks redundantly. However if the event
happens when ivi-surface is invisible, opacity is not calculated. This
patch removes this redundant check to fix potential bug.
Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
A weston_surface is transformed to multi screen coordinate, global
coordinate by matrix:m now.
Additionally, a mask needs to be calucated, taking account into,
- multi screen coordination: a destination rectangle of layer in the
coordination is easily calcurated by adding weston_output.{x,y} in
simple. This is because there is no scaled and rotated transformation.
- intersect inside of a screen the layer is assigned to. This is because
overlapped region of weston surface in another screen shall not be
displayed according to ivi use case.
Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <nobuhiko_tanibata@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
In single screen, the coordinates of layer local coordinates are the
same as global coordinates. However, to support multi screens, the
layer-local coordinates shall be transformed to multi screen coordinates,
which is global coordinates. The abosolute coordinates of a screen in global
stored in (x,y) of output of its weston output so it shall be used to
transform layer-local to global coordinates.
Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <nobuhiko_tanibata@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
For multi screen support, ivi_layout_screen to be taken account into
property change in commitChanges.
Property change is now done in update_prop so to consider ivi_screen
property for caluculating transform of weston surface, ivi_layout_screen
is added as a parameter of update_prop.
However, update_prop of weston_view of a ivi_surface can not be done
even if it is set on a screen. The propoerty change shall be done only
when a visibility of ivi_surface or ivi_layer which contains the
ivi_surface is ON. Such a condition shall be checked at commit_changes
as well to avoid calling update_prop, which actually updates
weston_views.
Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <nobuhiko_tanibata@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
It breaks from wl_list_for_each of screens when the frist screen found.
Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
This is potential bug when it supports several screens. If view_list is
initilized here, the views, which are set by the previous screen, are
cleared. So View list shall be initilized in front of wl_list_for_each
of all screens.
Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
In just previous wl_list_for_each_safe, list of layer in a screen is
cleaned up. And then, the list is re-constructed from
pending.layer_list.
In this re-construction, if order.link of a layer were inserted into a
screen whose number is later one of current screen, the order.link will
inserted into layer_list of two screens. This shall be avoided.
However, if we want to implement a feature to allow a layer to be added
to multiple screens. A layer shall have several order.link per screens.
So, I marked here as TODO.
Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
It just return the first screen found in screen list.
Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
The name of ivi_controller_interface is changed to ivi_layout_interface
with this patch.
This name is better suited to the interface, because it is implemented
in ivi-layout.c and its methods are linked to ivi_layout* functions.
Furthermore, the controller modules (e.g. hmi-controller) are the users
of this interface and they have their own interfaces,
which are called *_controller_interface,
e.g.: ivi_hmi_controller_interface.
This causes confusion about the software architecture.
Signed-off-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
Tested-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
The internal API "get_weston_view" is introduced, which returns the
weston_view of the given ivi_layout_surface. The API returns a NULL
pointer, if the ivi_layout_surface does not have any weston_view.
The weston_view is required in many places of ivi-shell implementation.
Therefore, this API will reduce lines of code. Furthermore, it will
increase the maintainability of the ivi-shell implementation.
Old way of getting the weston_view was flawed, because the views list of
the weston_surface is read without controlling the existence of the
weston_surface. New implementation explicitly throws an error if the
weston_surface does not exist.
Signed-off-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
Tested-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
[Pekka: Line-wrapped the commit message.]
This internal API is redundant, because a surface is allowed to be only
on one layer.
Signed-off-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
Tested-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
This internal API is redundant, because a layer is allowed to be only on
one screen.
Signed-off-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
Tested-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
link_layer's sole purpose is to link a surface to multiple layers, if
the surface should be shown in multiple layers. This can be only
achieved, if the surface has multiple weston_views with different
transformation matrices.
Current implementation assumes in many places that a ivi_surface has
only one weston_view. Therefore, a surface can be only shown on one
layer.
Although this (a surface on multiple layers) is a nice to have feature
for ivi-shell, it is not very crucial. In any case, it is not an easy
task to implement this feature, because it has lot of corner cases.
I removed with this patch the link_layer data structure, because it does
not have any purpose in current implementation.
Signed-off-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
Tested-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
[Pekka: Line-wrapped the commit message.]
link_screen's sole purpose is to link a layer to multiple screens, if
the layer should be shown in multiple screens. This can be only
achieved, if surfaces of the layer have multiple weston_views dedicated
to the different screens.
Current implementation assumes in many places that a ivi_surface has
only one weston_view. Therefore, a layer can be only shown on one
screen.
Although this (a layer on multiple screens) is a nice to have feature
for ivi-shell, it is not very crucial. In any case, it is not an easy
task to implement this feature, because it has lot of corner cases.
I removed with this patch the link_screen data structure, because it
does not have any purpose in current implementation.
Signed-off-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
Tested-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
[Pekka: Line-wrapped commit message.]
View clip region is set in surface-local coordinates. To compute that
region, the ivi-layer destination rectangle in the global coordinates
are transformed back into the surface-local coordinates.
The transformation is computed by first forming the transformation
matric for the forward mappings, and then inverting it. The inverse
matric is used to transform the destination rectangles to the
surface-local coordinate system. The intersection of the rectangles is
the view clip mask.
Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Bryce Harrington <bryce@osg.samsung.com>
Checking wl_list_empty() on a link offers no information: if it returns
true, wl_list_remove() is safe to do. If it returns false, you still do
not know if wl_list_remove() is safe; the link could be part of a list,
or the link could be "uninitialized" (e.g. just wl_list_remove()'d).
(From Pekka Paalanen's comment at
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/2015-August/023987.html).
Calling wl_list_init just before wl_list_insert is redundant. Because
the links of the list are not read before it is overwritten by
wl_list_insert.
Signed-off-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
[Pekka: line-wrapped commit message]
Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
It is only possible to remove a layer from the order.layer_list of a
screen, when ivi_layout_screen_set_render_order is called with an empty
array. Therefore, list of layers are cumulated if the API is called
many times with different list of layers.
Change how the flags are set:
- Introduce the dirty parameter for triggering the render order change.
- IVI_NOTIFICATION_REMOVE/ADD flags are set only at commit_screen_list.
Checking wl_list_empty() on a link offers no information: if it returns
true, wl_list_remove() is safe to do. If it returns false, you still do
not know if wl_list_remove() is safe; the link could be part of a list,
or the link could be "uninitialized" (e.g. just wl_list_remove()'d).
(From Pekka Paalanen's comment at
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/2015-August/023987.html).
Calling wl_list_init just before wl_list_insert is redundant. Because
the links of the list are not read before it is overwritten by
wl_list_insert.
Use assert to control if the ivilayer->order.surface_list is empty.
Signed-off-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
[Pekka: line-wrapped commit message]
Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
It is only possible to remove a surface from the order.surface_list of a
layer, when ivi_layout_layer_set_render_order is called with an empty
array. Therefore, list of surfaces are cumulated if the API is called
many times with different list of surfaces.
Change how the flags are set:
- Introduce the dirty parameter for triggering the render order change.
- IVI_NOTIFICATION_REMOVE/ADD flags are set only at commit_layer_list.
Checking wl_list_empty() on a link offers no information: if it returns
true, wl_list_remove() is safe to do. If it returns false, you still do
not know if wl_list_remove() is safe; the link could be part of a list,
or the link could be "uninitialized" (e.g. just wl_list_remove()'d).
(From Pekka Paalanen's comment at
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/2015-August/023987.html).
Calling wl_list_init just before wl_list_insert is redundant, because
the links of the list are not read before it is overwritten by
wl_list_insert.
Use assert to control if the ivilayer->order.surface_list is empty.
Signed-off-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
[Pekka: wrapped the commit message]
Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
[Earlier version Reviewed-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata
<NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>]
The final list of surfaces of set render order shall be applied. So link
of surfaces and list of surfaces in a layer shall be initialized. And
then the order of surfaces shall be restructured.
Use existing clear_surface_pending_list function to clear the list.
Signed-off-by: Emre Ucan <eucan@de.adit-jv.com>
Tested-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
- opening braces are on the same line as the if statement
- opening braces are not on the same line as the function name
- space between for/while/if and opening parenthesis
Signed-off-by: Dawid Gajownik <gajownik@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Derek Foreman <derekf@osg.samsung.com>
Transform matrix for transforming a surface to global_matrix is
calculated from
* ivi_layout_surface_properties
* ivi_layout_layer_properties
This patch pareares sub-method like following,
1/ calc_surface_to_global_matrix()
calc_transformation_matrix() is called twice with
ivi_layout_surface/layer_properties respectively.
2/ calc_transformation_matrix()
This calcurates matrix from orientation, source rectangle and
destination rectangle.
2-1/ To calculate rotation, fit centor of source rectangle to (0,0)
temporarily. This is moved back in 2-4.
2-2/ Apply rotation variant
2-3/ Apply scale variant
2-4/ Apply positioning variant, taking account into 2-1 temporary
positioning.
Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Acked-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
To refactor transform of ivi_layout_surface and ivi_layout_surface to be
more readable logical flow.
Remove following parts once,
* definition of weston_transform in ivi_layout_surface
* update_layer_orientation
* update_layer_position
* update_surface_position
* update_surface_orientation
* update_scale
Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
There is no logic update.
Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
"remove" is not proper name beacause it destorys a layer. The name of
the api is changed from layer_remove to layer_destroy.
Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
Ucan, Emre (ADITG/SW1)
Pekka Paalanen
Mateusz Polrola
Wataru Natsume
Nobuhiko Tanibata
Lucas Tanure
Dawid Gajownik