Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: PortDisable

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    23

    PortDisable

    Hi,

    Can anyone confirm that the diagram below is an accurate representation of the sequence when disabling a port? I created this diagram based on section 3.2.2.5 of the spec assuming an out-of-context implementation.

    Thanks
    Phil

    [attachment=0:2o8m254e]portdisable.GIF[/attachment:2o8m254e]
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    4

    Re: PortDisable

    I think the bEnabled field of the port definition structure should be changed in the context of the original call to disable the port. In this way, there is no race condition if the client should query the port immediately after sending the original disable command.

    Otherwise that looks plausible.

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    23

    Re: PortDisable

    I did wonder about that... Setting PortDef.bEnabled in the callers context sort of goes against the grain of queueing the commands to be actioned by a separate task. Certainly, this isn't clear fom the spec.

    To avoid the race condition, in a system without tunneling, the Client can wait for all buffers to be returned to the supplier (the Client in this case). However I don't know if that will work with tunneling - not something I have looked into at the moment.

Similar Threads

  1. PortDisable
    By pedwo in forum OpenMAX
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-01-1970, 12:00 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •