Re: [PATCH 2/3] server: Added server-side raw input function implementations (try 4)

[Vitaliy Margolen]

On 06/20/2011 02:55 AM, Vincas Miliūnas wrote:
> (see the message in the first part of the patch)
> +struct raw_input
> +{
> +    struct list    entry;
> +    unsigned short usage_page;
> +    unsigned short usage;
> +    BOOL           processed;
> +    BOOL           retrieved;
> +    RAWINPUT       raw;
> +
> +    /* common fields */
> +    unsigned int   type;
> +    unsigned int   message;
> +    unsigned int   flags;
> +    unsigned int   extra_info;
> +
> +    /* mouse fields */
> +    unsigned int   point_x;
> +    unsigned int   point_y;
> +    unsigned int   mouse_data;
> +    unsigned int   cursor_x;
> +    unsigned int   cursor_y;
> +
> +    /* keyboard fields */
> +    unsigned int   vk_code;
> +    unsigned int   scan_code;
> +};
> Mouse and keyboard fields should be a union to save space.
> +#define NUM_RAW_DEVICES (sizeof( raw_devices ) / sizeof( struct raw_device ))
> Please use "sizeof(array)/sizeof(array[0])" construct instead.
> +    UINT i, size_in_bytes;
> In server please use standard C types ("unsigned int" in this case).
> +        /* Currently fake handles are provided, however they are only used for the GetRawInputDeviceInfo function,
> +           thus it should not create any undesirable side effects */
> +        result[i].hDevice = (HANDLE)raw_devices[i].handle;
> This doesn't sound right. What this handle can be used for?
> +    if (!(raw = malloc( sizeof( *raw ) )))
> In server please use mem_alloc() instead.
> +/* Unregister a raw input device */
> +DECL_HANDLER(unregister_raw_input_device)
> I don't see handing of case where device is not found. Should you return 
> error instead?
> +    LIST_FOR_EACH( registration_entry, ¤t->process->raw_registered )
> +    {
> +        struct raw_registration *registration = LIST_ENTRY( registration_entry, struct raw_registration, entry );
> You can use this instead:
> LIST_FOR_EACH_ENTRY( registration, ¤t->process->raw_registered, 
> struct raw_registration, entry )
> +    /* Prevent unprocessed raw input entries from being queued indefinitely */
> +    while (current->process->raw_inputs_len >= MAX_RAW_INPUT_QUEUE_LENGTH)
> +    {
> +        struct raw_input *head = LIST_ENTRY( list_head( ¤t->process->raw_inputs ), struct raw_input, entry );
> +        list_remove( &head->entry );
> +        current->process->raw_inputs_len -= 1;
> +        free( head );
> +    }
> Looks like you need a circular buffer (an array of fixed size with head and 
> tail pointers) instead of a list here.

Vitaliy.

[PATCH 2/3] server: Added server-side raw input function implementations (try 4)

[Vincas Miliūnas]

On 06/20/2011 05:24 PM, Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
> On 06/20/2011 02:55 AM, Vincas Miliūnas wrote:
> > (see the message in the first part of the patch)
> > +struct raw_input
> > +{
> > +    struct list    entry;
> > +    unsigned short usage_page;
> > +    unsigned short usage;
> > +    BOOL           processed;
> > +    BOOL           retrieved;
> > +    RAWINPUT       raw;
> > +
> > +    /* common fields */
> > +    unsigned int   type;
> > +    unsigned int   message;
> > +    unsigned int   flags;
> > +    unsigned int   extra_info;
> > +
> > +    /* mouse fields */
> > +    unsigned int   point_x;
> > +    unsigned int   point_y;
> > +    unsigned int   mouse_data;
> > +    unsigned int   cursor_x;
> > +    unsigned int   cursor_y;
> > +
> > +    /* keyboard fields */
> > +    unsigned int   vk_code;
> > +    unsigned int   scan_code;
> > +};
> > Mouse and keyboard fields should be a union to save space.
> > +#define NUM_RAW_DEVICES (sizeof( raw_devices ) / sizeof( struct raw_device ))
> > Please use "sizeof(array)/sizeof(array[0])" construct instead.
> > +    UINT i, size_in_bytes;
> > In server please use standard C types ("unsigned int" in this case).
> > +        /* Currently fake handles are provided, however they are only used for the GetRawInputDeviceInfo function,
> > +           thus it should not create any undesirable side effects */
> > +        result[i].hDevice = (HANDLE)raw_devices[i].handle;
> > This doesn't sound right. What this handle can be used for?
> > +    if (!(raw = malloc( sizeof( *raw ) )))
> > In server please use mem_alloc() instead.
> > +/* Unregister a raw input device */
> > +DECL_HANDLER(unregister_raw_input_device)
> > I don't see handing of case where device is not found. Should you return 
> > error instead?
> > +    LIST_FOR_EACH( registration_entry, ¤t->process->raw_registered )
> > +    {
> > +        struct raw_registration *registration = LIST_ENTRY( registration_entry, struct raw_registration, entry );
> > You can use this instead:
> > LIST_FOR_EACH_ENTRY( registration, ¤t->process->raw_registered, 
> > struct raw_registration, entry )
> > +    /* Prevent unprocessed raw input entries from being queued indefinitely */
> > +    while (current->process->raw_inputs_len >= MAX_RAW_INPUT_QUEUE_LENGTH)
> > +    {
> > +        struct raw_input *head = LIST_ENTRY( list_head( ¤t->process->raw_inputs ), struct raw_input, entry );
> > +        list_remove( &head->entry );
> > +        current->process->raw_inputs_len -= 1;
> > +        free( head );
> > +    }
> > Looks like you need a circular buffer (an array of fixed size with head and 
> > tail pointers) instead of a list here.
>
> Vitaliy.

I've updated the patch and replied -
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2011-June/103346.html