forked from AuroraMiddleware/gtk
surface: Always set PHASE_PAINT as pending when updates are scheduled
At times (most often when closing subsurfaces that are scheduling relayouts) the PHASE_PAINT handling gets broken with the following sequence: 1. Surface receives wl_callback.done for the previous frame. Surface is thawed. 2. A new update on the surface is scheduled. PHASE_PAINT is requested directly on the frame clock. priv->pending_phase is left unset in the surface. 3. Surface gets frozen 4. Frame clock processes the update scheduled at 2. The surface is frozen, so paint is prevented. PHASE_PAINT is considered handled. 5. Compositor emits wl_callback.done again. Surface is thawed. 6. At this point the machinery is off - The surface didn't paint but has pending update regions - priv->draw_needed is set in the toplevel and other portions of the widget tree - So queueing redraws is ineffective at eventually calling gdk_surface_schedule_update() again on the toplevel surface. - We don't paint anymore, so this broken state is not flushed until other subsurface changes manage to schedule the missing update. To fix this, always set PHASE_PAINT in priv->pending_phase when doing gdk_surface_schedule_update(). If the frame clock turns around before the surface is thawed, it will still be waiting to be processed the next iteration. Fixes: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/-/issues/3750
This commit is contained in:
parent
5710df685b
commit
07167fdf22
@ -1299,12 +1299,11 @@ gdk_surface_schedule_update (GdkSurface *surface)
|
||||
|
||||
g_return_if_fail (surface);
|
||||
|
||||
surface->pending_phases |= GDK_FRAME_CLOCK_PHASE_PAINT;
|
||||
|
||||
if (surface->update_freeze_count ||
|
||||
gdk_surface_is_toplevel_frozen (surface))
|
||||
{
|
||||
surface->pending_phases |= GDK_FRAME_CLOCK_PHASE_PAINT;
|
||||
return;
|
||||
}
|
||||
return;
|
||||
|
||||
/* If there's no frame clock (a foreign surface), then the invalid
|
||||
* region will just stick around unless gdk_surface_process_updates()
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user