On 09.08.2016 18:40, Aric Stewart wrote:
Sort the groups by the service's tag to start in order
Signed-off-by: Aric Stewart aric@codeweavers.com
programs/services/services.c | 101 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- 1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
I believe this can be solved a bit easier. Why not just a sort function callback which sorts for both group and tag?
On 8/11/16 12:38 AM, Sebastian Lackner wrote:
On 09.08.2016 18:40, Aric Stewart wrote:
Sort the groups by the service's tag to start in order
Signed-off-by: Aric Stewart aric@codeweavers.com
programs/services/services.c | 101 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- 1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
I believe this can be solved a bit easier. Why not just a sort function callback which sorts for both group and tag?
I feel like that is what I am doing. Part of the reason I am breaking each group into a separate set it that we will be wanting to start a single winedevice process for each group and that felt like an easier way to organize it.
Alternate implementations are welcome.
-aric
On 11.08.2016 14:04, Aric Stewart wrote:
On 8/11/16 12:38 AM, Sebastian Lackner wrote:
On 09.08.2016 18:40, Aric Stewart wrote:
Sort the groups by the service's tag to start in order
Signed-off-by: Aric Stewart aric@codeweavers.com --- programs/services/services.c | 101 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- 1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
I believe this can be solved a bit easier. Why not just a sort function callback which sorts for both group and tag?
I feel like that is what I am doing. Part of the reason I am breaking each group into a separate set it that we will be wanting to start a single winedevice process for each group and that felt like an easier way to organize it.
Alternate implementations are welcome.
-aric
Well, one winedevice process might not always be sufficient. Wine also supports loading 32-bit drivers in a 64-bit wineprefix, so we might need at least two per group (default and wow64). Because of this issue, it seems easier to search for a matching winedevice instance during process startup.
In this patch, I would suggest to implement only the sorting itself, and then later let service_start_process() deal with the search for a running process of the same group / architecture / (probably other conditions). This would reduce the patch to a call of qsort() with a callback which sorts for both group and tag. I hope it is clear what I mean, if not I can also help you updating these parts.
Regards, Sebastian
On 8/11/16 7:19 AM, Sebastian Lackner wrote:
On 11.08.2016 14:04, Aric Stewart wrote:
On 8/11/16 12:38 AM, Sebastian Lackner wrote:
On 09.08.2016 18:40, Aric Stewart wrote:
Sort the groups by the service's tag to start in order
Signed-off-by: Aric Stewart aric@codeweavers.com --- programs/services/services.c | 101 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- 1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
I believe this can be solved a bit easier. Why not just a sort function callback which sorts for both group and tag?
I feel like that is what I am doing. Part of the reason I am breaking each group into a separate set it that we will be wanting to start a single winedevice process for each group and that felt like an easier way to organize it.
Alternate implementations are welcome.
-aric
Well, one winedevice process might not always be sufficient. Wine also supports loading 32-bit drivers in a 64-bit wineprefix, so we might need at least two per group (default and wow64). Because of this issue, it seems easier to search for a matching winedevice instance during process startup.
In this patch, I would suggest to implement only the sorting itself, and then later let service_start_process() deal with the search for a running process of the same group / architecture / (probably other conditions). This would reduce the patch to a call of qsort() with a callback which sorts for both group and tag. I hope it is clear what I mean, if not I can also help you updating these parts.
I know little to nothing about 64-bit and its effect here. So that is new.
If you have a clear idea on how you would like this to work then please feel free, that would be most useful. Unfortunately I am unable to dedicate my full time to this right now. (Too many other work projects demanding attention)
I would really like to get this functionality in (Multiple devices in the same process) so that I can shift to my Plug and play and HID work.
Otherwise I can circle back to this later today or a little tomorrow. You do have all my work here now submitted so you can see where I am going and what I need.
thanks, -aric
-
Aric Stewart -
Sebastian Lackner