Mir

Merge lp://qastaging/~mir-team/mir/fix-1376324-0.8 into lp://qastaging/mir/0.8

  1. fix-1376324-0.8
  2. Merge into 0.8
Proposed by Daniel van Vugt
Status: Merged
Approved by: Cemil Azizoglu
Approved revision: no longer in the source branch.
Merged at revision: 1969
Proposed branch: lp://qastaging/~mir-team/mir/fix-1376324-0.8
Merge into: lp://qastaging/mir/0.8
Diff against target: 368 lines (+186/-1)
16 files modified
CMakeLists.txt (+1/-1)
debian/changelog (+10/-0)
src/include/server/mir/compositor/buffer_stream.h (+1/-0)
src/server/compositor/buffer_bundle.h (+1/-0)
src/server/compositor/buffer_queue.cpp (+11/-0)
src/server/compositor/buffer_queue.h (+2/-0)
src/server/compositor/buffer_stream_surfaces.cpp (+5/-0)
src/server/compositor/buffer_stream_surfaces.h (+1/-0)
src/server/scene/basic_surface.cpp (+3/-0)
tests/include/mir_test_doubles/mock_buffer_bundle.h (+1/-0)
tests/include/mir_test_doubles/mock_buffer_stream.h (+1/-0)
tests/include/mir_test_doubles/stub_buffer_stream.h (+1/-0)
tests/integration-tests/CMakeLists.txt (+1/-0)
tests/integration-tests/surface_composition.cpp (+125/-0)
tests/integration-tests/test_exchange_buffer.cpp (+1/-0)
tests/unit-tests/compositor/test_buffer_queue.cpp (+21/-0)
To merge this branch: bzr merge lp://qastaging/~mir-team/mir/fix-1376324-0.8
Reviewer Review Type Date Requested Status
Cemil Azizoglu (community) Approve
Robert Carr (community) Approve
Review via email: mp+246280@code.qastaging.launchpad.net

Commit message

Backport fix for USC crash LP: #1376324

Description of the change

Because if you look closely, it's still crashing for RTM devices (Mir 0.8.0) that lack the fix:
https://errors.ubuntu.com/problem/bfb855ebc60f251bf495a2ffb24f2924c50bdbf8

Look closer again and you'll see evidence of vivid (Mir 0.9 devices) crashing too. But I think that's actually a different bug with the same basic signature -> bug 1401488 that only exists in 0.9 and later.

So in theory, this fix is all that's needed for 0.8 and RTM.

To post a comment you must log in.
Revision history for this message
Daniel van Vugt (vanvugt) wrote :

Yeah I know it's probably too late for 0.8.1 now we have a revision in QA already. This might be a good idea for 0.8.2 later though.

Discuss.

Revision history for this message
Cemil Azizoglu (cemil-azizoglu) wrote :

Daniel, thanks for being on top of the bugs and raising. We'll try to convince product owners to land this.

review: Approve
Revision history for this message
Cemil Azizoglu (cemil-azizoglu) wrote :

(Let's try this again)

Daniel, thanks for being on top of the bugs and bringing attention to this. We'll try to convince product owners to land it.

review: Approve
Revision history for this message
Cemil Azizoglu (cemil-azizoglu) wrote :

Daniel, I just noticed Saviq's silo has landed. So we should probably merge back the bot's changelog changes also.

Product owners have approved it. I'll probably put it in a silo tomorrow.

review: Needs Fixing
Revision history for this message
Daniel van Vugt (vanvugt) wrote :

Cemil: The bot's changelog is grossly incorrect as mentioned in email.. And it makes me suspicious of what actually landed.

Revision history for this message
Daniel van Vugt (vanvugt) wrote :

BTW, I don't know where the silo landed too -- I haven't yet found any branch having been updated yet.

Revision history for this message
Cemil Azizoglu (cemil-azizoglu) wrote :

Silo landed on RTM. As Saviq mentioned in an email, the train updates the changelog like that when the branch has never been used to land in RTM before. Up until Saviq's landing, it had been only used for ubuntu and then the source package was used to sync to rtm.

This will land in 0.8.2 (which means this branch needs to be updated with the correct PATCH version etc.).

Revision history for this message
Robert Carr (robertcarr) wrote :

looks ok to me. ABI looks unchanged.

review: Approve
Revision history for this message
Cemil Azizoglu (cemil-azizoglu) wrote :

All tests passed. In the QA queue now.

review: Approve
Revision history for this message
Daniel van Vugt (vanvugt) wrote :

Should we expect some script/robot/silo to land this or is manual intervention required?

Preview Diff

[H/L] Next/Prev Comment, [J/K] Next/Prev File, [N/P] Next/Prev Hunk
The diff is not available at this time. You can reload the page or download it.

Subscribers

People subscribed via source and target branches

to all changes: