2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
# Contributing to wlroots
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contributing just involves sending a pull request. You will probably be more
|
2017-08-20 14:08:43 +02:00
|
|
|
successful with your contribution if you visit
|
2021-05-26 22:21:06 +02:00
|
|
|
[#sway-devel on Libera Chat](https://web.libera.chat/?channels=#sway-devel) upfront and
|
2021-05-19 15:56:14 +02:00
|
|
|
discuss your plans.
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2017-12-27 16:39:53 +01:00
|
|
|
Note: rules are made to be broken. Adjust or ignore any/all of these as you see
|
|
|
|
fit, but be prepared to justify it to your peers.
|
|
|
|
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
## Pull Requests
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you already have your own pull request habits, feel free to use them. If you
|
|
|
|
don't, however, allow me to make a suggestion: feature branches pulled from
|
|
|
|
upstream. Try this:
|
|
|
|
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
1. Fork wlroots
|
|
|
|
2. `git clone https://github.com/username/wlroots && cd wlroots`
|
2017-10-03 04:27:39 +02:00
|
|
|
3. `git remote add upstream https://github.com/swaywm/wlroots`
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You only need to do this once. You're never going to use your fork's master
|
|
|
|
branch. Instead, when you start working on a feature, do this:
|
|
|
|
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
1. `git fetch upstream`
|
|
|
|
2. `git checkout -b add-so-and-so-feature upstream/master`
|
|
|
|
3. Add and commit your changes
|
|
|
|
4. `git push -u origin add-so-and-so-feature`
|
|
|
|
5. Make a pull request from your feature branch
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2017-12-27 16:39:53 +01:00
|
|
|
When you submit your pull request, your commit log should do most of the talking
|
|
|
|
when it comes to describing your changes and their motivation. In addition to
|
|
|
|
this, your pull request's comments will ideally include a test plan that the
|
|
|
|
reviewers can use to (1) demonstrate the problem on master, if applicable and
|
|
|
|
(2) verify that the problem no longer exists with your changes applied (or that
|
|
|
|
your new features work correctly). Document all of the edge cases you're aware
|
|
|
|
of so we can adequately test them - then verify the test plan yourself before
|
|
|
|
submitting.
|
|
|
|
|
2021-08-30 15:20:27 +02:00
|
|
|
## Commit Log
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unlike many projects using GitHub and GitLab, wlroots has a [linear, "recipe"
|
|
|
|
style](https://www.bitsnbites.eu/git-history-work-log-vs-recipe/) history. This
|
|
|
|
means that every commit should be small, digestible, stand-alone, and
|
|
|
|
functional. Rather than a purely chronological commit history like this:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
doc: final docs for view transforms
|
|
|
|
fix tests when disabled, redo broken doc formatting
|
|
|
|
better transformed-view iteration (thanks Hannah!)
|
|
|
|
try to catch more cases in tests
|
|
|
|
tests: add new spline test
|
|
|
|
fix compilation on splines
|
|
|
|
doc: notes on reticulating splines
|
|
|
|
compositor: add spline reticulation for view transforms
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We aim to have a clean history which only reflects the final state, broken up
|
|
|
|
into functional groupings:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
compositor: add spline reticulation for view transforms
|
|
|
|
compositor: new iterator for view transforms
|
|
|
|
tests: add view-transform correctness tests
|
|
|
|
doc: fix formatting for view transforms
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This ensures that the final patch series only contains the final state,
|
|
|
|
without the changes and missteps taken along the development process. A linear
|
|
|
|
history eases reviewing, cherry-picking and reverting changes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you aren't comfortable with manipulating the Git history, have a look at
|
|
|
|
[git-rebase.io](https://git-rebase.io/).
|
|
|
|
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
## Commit Messages
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please strive to write good commit messages. Here's some guidelines to follow:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The first line should be limited to 50 characters and should be a sentence that
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
completes the thought [When applied, this commit will...] *"Implement
|
|
|
|
cmd_move"* or *"Fix #742"* or *"Improve performance of arrange_windows on ARM"*
|
|
|
|
or similar.
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
The subsequent lines should be separated from the subject line by a single
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
blank line, and include optional details. In this you can give justification
|
|
|
|
for the change, [reference Github
|
|
|
|
issues](https://help.github.com/articles/closing-issues-via-commit-messages/),
|
|
|
|
or explain some of the subtler details of your patch. This is important because
|
|
|
|
when someone finds a line of code they don't understand later, they can use the
|
|
|
|
`git blame` command to find out what the author was thinking when they wrote
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
it. It's also easier to review your pull requests if they're separated into
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
logical commits that have good commit messages and justify themselves in the
|
|
|
|
extended commit description.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a good rule of thumb, anything you might put into the pull request
|
|
|
|
description on Github is probably fair game for going into the extended commit
|
|
|
|
message as well.
|
|
|
|
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
See [here](https://chris.beams.io/posts/git-commit/) for more details.
|
|
|
|
|
2017-12-27 16:39:53 +01:00
|
|
|
## Code Review
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When your changes are submitted for review, one or more core committers will
|
|
|
|
look over them. Smaller changes might be merged with little fanfare, but larger
|
|
|
|
changes will typically see review from several people. Be prepared to receive
|
|
|
|
some feedback - you may be asked to make changes to your work. Our code review
|
|
|
|
process is:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. **Triage** the pull request. Do the commit messages make sense? Is a test
|
|
|
|
plan necessary and/or present? Add anyone as reviewers that you think should
|
|
|
|
be there (using the relevant GitHub feature, if you have the permissions, or
|
|
|
|
with an @mention if necessary).
|
|
|
|
2. **Review** the code. Look for code style violations, naming convention
|
|
|
|
violations, buffer overflows, memory leaks, logic errors, non-portable code
|
|
|
|
(including GNU-isms), etc. For significant changes to the public API, loop in
|
|
|
|
a couple more people for discussion.
|
|
|
|
3. **Execute** the test plan, if present.
|
|
|
|
4. **Merge** the pull request when all reviewers approve.
|
|
|
|
5. **File** follow-up tickets if appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Style Reference
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
wlroots is written in C with a style similar to the [kernel
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
style](https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst), but
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
with a few notable differences.
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
Try to keep your code conforming to C11 and POSIX as much as possible, and do
|
|
|
|
not use GNU extensions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Brackets
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2018-04-21 12:44:59 +02:00
|
|
|
Brackets always go on the same line, including in functions.
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
Always include brackets for if/while/for, even if it's a single statement.
|
|
|
|
```c
|
2018-05-31 02:11:57 +02:00
|
|
|
void function(void) {
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
if (condition1) {
|
|
|
|
do_thing1();
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (condition2) {
|
|
|
|
do_thing2();
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
} else {
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
do_thing3();
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
### Indentation
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
Indentations are a single tab.
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
For long lines that need to be broken, the continuation line should be indented
|
2018-04-21 12:44:59 +02:00
|
|
|
with an additional tab.
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
If the line being broken is opening a new block (functions, if, while, etc.),
|
|
|
|
the continuation line should be indented with two tabs, so they can't be
|
|
|
|
misread as being part of the block.
|
|
|
|
```c
|
|
|
|
really_long_function(argument1, argument2, ...,
|
|
|
|
argument3, argument4);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (condition1 && condition2 && ...
|
|
|
|
condition3 && condition4) {
|
|
|
|
do_thing();
|
2017-06-06 16:54:53 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Try to break the line in the place which you think is the most appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Line Length
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Try to keep your lines under 80 columns, but you can go up to 100 if it
|
2017-12-27 16:39:53 +01:00
|
|
|
improves readability. Don't break lines indiscriminately, try to find nice
|
|
|
|
breaking points so your code is easy to read.
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Names
|
|
|
|
|
2018-04-21 12:44:59 +02:00
|
|
|
Global function and type names should be prefixed with `wlr_submodule_` (e.g.
|
|
|
|
`struct wlr_output`, `wlr_output_set_cursor`). For static functions and
|
|
|
|
types local to a file, the names chosen aren't as important. Local function
|
|
|
|
names shouldn't have a `wlr_` prefix.
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2017-09-30 04:15:43 +02:00
|
|
|
For include guards, use the header's filename relative to include. Uppercase
|
|
|
|
all of the characters, and replace any invalid characters with an underscore.
|
|
|
|
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
### Construction/Destruction Functions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For functions that are responsible for constructing and destructing an object,
|
|
|
|
they should be written as a pair of one of two forms:
|
|
|
|
* `init`/`finish`: These initialize/deinitialize a type, but are **NOT**
|
|
|
|
responsible for allocating it. They should accept a pointer to some
|
|
|
|
pre-allocated memory (e.g. a member of a struct).
|
|
|
|
* `create`/`destroy`: These also initialize/deinitialize, but will return a
|
|
|
|
pointer to a `malloc`ed chunk of memory, and will `free` it in `destroy`.
|
|
|
|
|
2017-08-20 10:35:43 +02:00
|
|
|
A destruction function should always be able to accept a NULL pointer or a
|
|
|
|
zeroed value and exit cleanly; this simplifies error handling a lot.
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Error Codes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For functions not returning a value, they should return a (stdbool.h) bool to
|
|
|
|
indicated if they succeeded or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Macros
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Try to keep the use of macros to a minimum, especially if a function can do the
|
|
|
|
job. If you do need to use them, try to keep them close to where they're being
|
|
|
|
used and `#undef` them after.
|
|
|
|
|
2018-04-29 23:42:35 +02:00
|
|
|
### Example
|
2017-09-30 04:15:43 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```c
|
|
|
|
struct wlr_backend *wlr_backend_autocreate(struct wl_display *display) {
|
|
|
|
struct wlr_backend *backend;
|
|
|
|
if (getenv("WAYLAND_DISPLAY") || getenv("_WAYLAND_DISPLAY")) {
|
|
|
|
backend = attempt_wl_backend(display);
|
|
|
|
if (backend) {
|
|
|
|
return backend;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const char *x11_display = getenv("DISPLAY");
|
|
|
|
if (x11_display) {
|
|
|
|
return wlr_x11_backend_create(display, x11_display);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Attempt DRM+libinput
|
2017-08-20 09:55:18 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2017-09-30 04:15:43 +02:00
|
|
|
struct wlr_session *session = wlr_session_create(display);
|
|
|
|
if (!session) {
|
2018-07-09 23:49:54 +02:00
|
|
|
wlr_log(WLR_ERROR, "Failed to start a DRM session");
|
2017-09-30 04:15:43 +02:00
|
|
|
return NULL;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
int gpu = wlr_session_find_gpu(session);
|
|
|
|
if (gpu == -1) {
|
2018-07-09 23:49:54 +02:00
|
|
|
wlr_log(WLR_ERROR, "Failed to open DRM device");
|
2017-09-30 04:15:43 +02:00
|
|
|
goto error_session;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
backend = wlr_multi_backend_create(session);
|
|
|
|
if (!backend) {
|
|
|
|
goto error_gpu;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
struct wlr_backend *libinput = wlr_libinput_backend_create(display, session);
|
|
|
|
if (!libinput) {
|
|
|
|
goto error_multi;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
struct wlr_backend *drm = wlr_drm_backend_create(display, session, gpu);
|
|
|
|
if (!drm) {
|
|
|
|
goto error_libinput;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wlr_multi_backend_add(backend, libinput);
|
|
|
|
wlr_multi_backend_add(backend, drm);
|
|
|
|
return backend;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
error_libinput:
|
|
|
|
wlr_backend_destroy(libinput);
|
|
|
|
error_multi:
|
|
|
|
wlr_backend_destroy(backend);
|
|
|
|
error_gpu:
|
|
|
|
wlr_session_close_file(session, gpu);
|
|
|
|
error_session:
|
|
|
|
wlr_session_destroy(session);
|
|
|
|
return NULL;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
2018-04-29 23:42:35 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Wayland protocol implementation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Each protocol generally lives in a file with the same name, usually containing
|
2018-07-03 15:03:00 +02:00
|
|
|
at least one struct for each interface in the protocol. For instance,
|
2018-04-29 23:42:35 +02:00
|
|
|
`xdg_shell` lives in `types/wlr_xdg_shell.h` and has a `wlr_xdg_surface` struct.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Globals
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Global interfaces generally have public constructors and destructors. Their
|
2019-11-16 18:31:33 +01:00
|
|
|
struct has a field holding the `wl_global` itself, a destroy signal and a
|
|
|
|
`wl_display` destroy listener. Example:
|
2018-04-29 23:42:35 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```c
|
|
|
|
struct wlr_compositor {
|
2018-07-08 20:21:31 +02:00
|
|
|
struct wl_global *global;
|
2018-04-29 23:42:35 +02:00
|
|
|
…
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
struct wl_listener display_destroy;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
struct {
|
|
|
|
struct wl_signal new_surface;
|
|
|
|
struct wl_signal destroy;
|
|
|
|
} events;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When the destructor is called, it should emit the destroy signal, remove the
|
2019-11-16 18:31:33 +01:00
|
|
|
display destroy listener, destroy the `wl_global` and then destroy the struct.
|
|
|
|
The destructor can assume all clients and resources have been already
|
|
|
|
destroyed.
|
2018-04-29 23:42:35 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Resources
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resources are the representation of Wayland objects on the compositor side. They
|
|
|
|
generally have an associated struct, called the _object struct_, stored in their
|
|
|
|
`user_data` field.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Object structs can be retrieved from resources via `wl_resource_get_data`. To
|
|
|
|
prevent bad casts, a safe helper function checking the type of the resource is
|
|
|
|
used:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```c
|
|
|
|
static const struct wl_surface_interface surface_impl;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
struct wlr_surface *wlr_surface_from_resource(struct wl_resource *resource) {
|
|
|
|
assert(wl_resource_instance_of(resource, &wl_surface_interface,
|
|
|
|
&surface_impl));
|
|
|
|
return wl_resource_get_user_data(resource);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
2020-06-05 16:43:45 +02:00
|
|
|
If a pointer to a `wl_resource` is stored, a resource destroy handler needs to
|
|
|
|
be registered to clean it up. libwayland will automatically destroy resources
|
|
|
|
in an arbitrary order when a client is disconnected, the compositor must handle
|
|
|
|
this correctly.
|
|
|
|
|
2018-04-29 23:42:35 +02:00
|
|
|
### Destroying resources
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Object structs should only be destroyed when their resource is destroyed, ie.
|
|
|
|
in the resource destroy handler (set with `wl_resource_set_implementation`).
|
|
|
|
|
2020-06-05 16:44:40 +02:00
|
|
|
- If the object has a destructor request: the request handler should just call
|
|
|
|
`wl_resource_destroy` and do nothing else. The compositor must not destroy
|
|
|
|
resources on its own outside the destructor request handler.
|
|
|
|
- If the protocol specifies that an object is destroyed when an event is sent:
|
|
|
|
it's the only case where the compositor is allowed to send the event and then
|
|
|
|
call `wl_resource_destroy`. An example of this is `wl_callback`.
|
2018-04-29 23:42:35 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Inert resources
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some resources can become inert in situations described in the protocol or when
|
|
|
|
the compositor decides to get rid of them. All requests made to inert resources
|
|
|
|
should be ignored, except the destructor. This is achieved by:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. When the resource becomes inert: destroy the object struct and call
|
|
|
|
`wl_resource_set_user_data(resource, NULL)`. Do not destroy the resource.
|
|
|
|
2. For each request made to a resource that can be inert: add a NULL check to
|
|
|
|
ignore the request if the resource is inert.
|
|
|
|
3. When the client calls the destructor request on the resource: call
|
|
|
|
`wl_resource_destroy(resource)` as usual.
|
|
|
|
4. When the resource is destroyed, if the resource isn't inert, destroy the
|
|
|
|
object struct.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Example:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```c
|
|
|
|
// Handles the destroy request
|
|
|
|
static void subsurface_handle_destroy(struct wl_client *client,
|
|
|
|
struct wl_resource *resource) {
|
|
|
|
wl_resource_destroy(resource);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Handles a regular request
|
|
|
|
static void subsurface_set_position(struct wl_client *client,
|
|
|
|
struct wl_resource *resource, int32_t x, int32_t y) {
|
|
|
|
struct wlr_subsurface *subsurface = subsurface_from_resource(resource);
|
|
|
|
if (subsurface == NULL) {
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
…
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Destroys the wlr_subsurface struct
|
|
|
|
static void subsurface_destroy(struct wlr_subsurface *subsurface) {
|
|
|
|
if (subsurface == NULL) {
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
…
|
2018-06-28 15:28:42 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wl_resource_set_user_data(subsurface->resource, NULL);
|
2018-04-29 23:42:35 +02:00
|
|
|
free(subsurface);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Resource destroy listener
|
|
|
|
static void subsurface_handle_resource_destroy(struct wl_resource *resource) {
|
|
|
|
struct wlr_subsurface *subsurface = subsurface_from_resource(resource);
|
|
|
|
subsurface_destroy(subsurface);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Makes the resource inert
|
|
|
|
static void subsurface_handle_surface_destroy(struct wl_listener *listener,
|
|
|
|
void *data) {
|
|
|
|
struct wlr_subsurface *subsurface =
|
|
|
|
wl_container_of(listener, subsurface, surface_destroy);
|
|
|
|
subsurface_destroy(subsurface);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|