[Webkit-unassigned] [Bug 48507] [GTK] Implement RunLoop, WorkQueue, Connection classes for WebKit2

[bugzilla-daemon at webkit.org]

https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48507


Martin Robinson <mrobinson at webkit.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #74930|review?                     |review-
               Flag|                            |




--- Comment #11 from Martin Robinson <mrobinson at webkit.org>  2010-11-28 04:58:12 PST ---
(From update of attachment 74930)
View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=74930&action=review

Great progress. I'm very happy with the elimination of the ioctl call. I still have a couple questions though.

> WebKit2/Platform/CoreIPC/gtk/ConnectionGtk.cpp:39
> +static const size_t messageInitialSize = 4096;

initialMessageBufferSize?

> WebKit2/Platform/CoreIPC/gtk/ConnectionGtk.cpp:49
> +    uint8_t* buffer = reinterpret_cast<uint8_t*>(ptr);

Why not just pass in a uint8_t pointer here?

> WebKit2/Platform/CoreIPC/gtk/ConnectionGtk.cpp:77
> +    uint8_t* buffer = reinterpret_cast<uint8_t*>(ptr);

Same.

> WebKit2/Platform/CoreIPC/gtk/ConnectionGtk.cpp:136
> +        if ((m_pendingBytes -= readBytesFromSocket(m_socket, (void*)(m_readBuffer.data() + (m_currentMessageSize - m_pendingBytes)), m_pendingBytes)) > 0)

Why not just pass a uint8_t*? Can't readBytesFromSocket just take a uint8_t. You shouldn't need to cast a pointer to void* anyway.

> WebKit2/Platform/gtk/RunLoopGtk.cpp:45
> +        m_runLoopMain = 0;

I don't think you need to set this to zero in the destructor.

> WebKit2/Platform/gtk/RunLoopGtk.cpp:50
> +        m_runLoopContext = 0;

Same.

> WebKit2/Platform/gtk/WorkQueueGtk.cpp:84
> +                return TRUE;

If the queue is invalid do we want to keep getting this callback? Can a queue ever change from the invalid state?

> WebKit2/Platform/gtk/WorkQueueGtk.cpp:161
> +    if (condition == G_IO_IN) {
> +        g_source_set_callback(dispatchSource, 
> +                              reinterpret_cast<GSourceFunc>(&WorkQueue::EventSource::performWork), 
> +                              eventSource, 
> +                              reinterpret_cast<GDestroyNotify>(&WorkQueue::EventSource::deleteEventSource));
> +    } else if (condition == (G_IO_HUP | G_IO_ERR)) {
> +        g_source_set_callback(dispatchSource, 
> +                              reinterpret_cast<GSourceFunc>(&WorkQueue::EventSource::closeConnection), 
> +                              eventSource, 
> +                              reinterpret_cast<GDestroyNotify>(&WorkQueue::EventSource::deleteEventSource));
> +    }

This design is a little bit unbalanced, I think. Both the caller and the callee need to know about the semantics of the g_source_set_callback call.  I'm not sure if it's possible to make the method more general or not. Maybe you could have a single source callback and pass some data about what the return value should be (true or false). That would remove the need for a specialized source callback (EventSource::closeConnection).

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.webkit.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.