buffer/device.destroy() unmaps buffer on current thread - #2837
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Adds some language that assumes multiple threads, which we don't have, but I think it's fine. Better to have this codified now. Unfortunately the language is hand-wavy, but this isn't going to get fixed until we have a clean client-vs-shared-vs-server state split. Fixes gpuweb#2545
toji
approved these changes
May 6, 2022
toji
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
TIL that browser's refer to their "threads" as agents! 🧑🎓
LGTM.
Contributor
Author
|
meeting: No objection (yet) to having destroy() do unmaps. I'll remove the references to threading and leave them for later when we spec multithreading. What's important is just that we know there's a possible solution for later. |
Contributor
Author
|
I just commented it out because I don't want to lose track of proposed solutions for multithreading. |
toji
approved these changes
May 11, 2022
toji
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM with threading text commented out.
github-actions Bot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 16, 2022
SHA: d71ec16 Reason: push, by @kainino0x Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
github-actions Bot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 16, 2022
SHA: d71ec16 Reason: push, by @kainino0x Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
github-actions Bot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 16, 2022
SHA: d71ec16 Reason: push, by @kainino0x Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
jdarpinian
pushed a commit
to jdarpinian/gpuweb
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 12, 2022
* buffer/device.destroy() unmaps buffer on current thread Adds some language that assumes multiple threads, which we don't have, but I think it's fine. Better to have this codified now. Unfortunately the language is hand-wavy, but this isn't going to get fixed until we have a clean client-vs-shared-vs-server state split. Fixes gpuweb#2545 * Comment out stuff about multithreading
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Adds some language that assumes multiple threads, which we don't have,but I think it's fine. Better to have this codified now.
Unfortunately the language is hand-wavy, but this isn't going to get
fixed until we have a clean client-vs-shared-vs-server state split.
Fixes #2545
Preview | Diff