[libcamera-devel] [PATCH v4 6/6] libcamera: request: Make it extensible

[Laurent Pinchart]

Hi Kieran,

Thank you for the patch.

On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 02:07:41PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote:
> Provide an extensible private object for the Request class.
> This allows us to make modifications to the private API and storage of
> requests without affecting the public API or ABI.
> 
> The D pointer is obtained in all Request functions implemented in the
> request.cpp file along with an assertion that the D pointer was valid to
> provide extra validation checking that the Request has not been
> deleted, while in use as it is 'owned' by the application.

s/, while in use/ while in use,/

> 
> Signed-off-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham at ideasonboard.com>
> 
> ---
> The assertions added in findBuffer, complete() and completeBuffer()
> allow us to ensure that the Request is still valid while asynchronous
> actions occur on the Request internally in libcamera, and provide
> (almost) equivalent functionality as the Request Canary previously
> proposed.

Does std::unique_ptr<> guarantees that it will reset its internal
pointer when deleted ? libc++ calls reset() in the destructor, and
stdlibc++ seems to set the pointer to nullptr manually, but that doesn't
seem to be guaranteed by the C++ standard.

> The additions in reuse() and addBuffer() are called from applications,
> so the assertions may be less helpful there, but I've added them for
> consistency.
> 
>  include/libcamera/request.h |  4 +++-
>  src/libcamera/request.cpp   | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/libcamera/request.h b/include/libcamera/request.h
> index 4cf5ff3f7d3b..909a1aebc2d2 100644
> --- a/include/libcamera/request.h
> +++ b/include/libcamera/request.h
> @@ -24,8 +24,10 @@ class CameraControlValidator;
>  class FrameBuffer;
>  class Stream;
>  
> -class Request
> +class Request : public Extensible
>  {
> +	LIBCAMERA_DECLARE_PRIVATE(Request)
> +
>  public:
>  	enum Status {
>  		RequestPending,
> diff --git a/src/libcamera/request.cpp b/src/libcamera/request.cpp
> index ce2dd7b17f10..977bfac4fce6 100644
> --- a/src/libcamera/request.cpp
> +++ b/src/libcamera/request.cpp
> @@ -28,6 +28,19 @@ namespace libcamera {
>  
>  LOG_DEFINE_CATEGORY(Request)
>  
> +class Request::Private : public Extensible::Private
> +{
> +	LIBCAMERA_DECLARE_PUBLIC(Request)
> +
> +public:
> +	Private(Request *request);
> +};
> +
> +Request::Private::Private(Request *request)
> +	: Extensible::Private(request)
> +{
> +}
> +
>  /**
>   * \enum Request::Status
>   * Request completion status
> @@ -73,8 +86,8 @@ LOG_DEFINE_CATEGORY(Request)
>   *
>   */
>  Request::Request(Camera *camera, uint64_t cookie)
> -	: camera_(camera), sequence_(0), cookie_(cookie),
> -	  status_(RequestPending), cancelled_(false)
> +	: Extensible(new Private(this)), camera_(camera), sequence_(0),
> +	  cookie_(cookie), status_(RequestPending), cancelled_(false)

Should we move some of the data to Private (in a subsequent patch) ? As
an exercise, how about moving the member data that we think will be
subject to change when we'll rework the request completion API, and see
if we manage to complete that rework without breaking the API of the
request class ?

A subsequent patch should also move the public functions that are not
called by applications to the Private class.

>  {
>  	/**
>  	 * \todo Should the Camera expose a validator instance, to avoid
> @@ -114,6 +127,9 @@ Request::~Request()
>   */
>  void Request::reuse(ReuseFlag flags)
>  {
> +	Private *const d = LIBCAMERA_D_PTR();
> +	ASSERT(d);
> +
>  	LIBCAMERA_TRACEPOINT(request_reuse, this);
>  
>  	pending_.clear();
> @@ -179,6 +195,9 @@ void Request::reuse(ReuseFlag flags)
>   */
>  int Request::addBuffer(const Stream *stream, FrameBuffer *buffer)
>  {
> +	Private *const d = LIBCAMERA_D_PTR();
> +	ASSERT(d);
> +
>  	if (!stream) {
>  		LOG(Request, Error) << "Invalid stream reference";
>  		return -EINVAL;
> @@ -214,6 +233,9 @@ int Request::addBuffer(const Stream *stream, FrameBuffer *buffer)
>   */
>  FrameBuffer *Request::findBuffer(const Stream *stream) const
>  {
> +	const Private *const d = LIBCAMERA_D_PTR();
> +	ASSERT(d);
> +
>  	const auto it = bufferMap_.find(stream);
>  	if (it == bufferMap_.end())
>  		return nullptr;
> @@ -282,6 +304,8 @@ FrameBuffer *Request::findBuffer(const Stream *stream) const
>   */
>  void Request::complete()
>  {
> +	Private *const d = LIBCAMERA_D_PTR();
> +	ASSERT(d);
>  	ASSERT(status_ == RequestPending);
>  	ASSERT(!hasPendingBuffers());
>  
> @@ -307,6 +331,9 @@ void Request::complete()
>   */
>  bool Request::completeBuffer(FrameBuffer *buffer)
>  {
> +	Private *const d = LIBCAMERA_D_PTR();
> +	ASSERT(d);
> +
>  	LIBCAMERA_TRACEPOINT(request_complete_buffer, this, buffer);
>  
>  	int ret = pending_.erase(buffer);
> @@ -330,6 +357,9 @@ bool Request::completeBuffer(FrameBuffer *buffer)
>   */
>  std::string Request::toString() const
>  {
> +	const Private *const d = LIBCAMERA_D_PTR();
> +	ASSERT(d);
> +
>  	std::stringstream ss;
>  
>  	/* Pending, Completed, Cancelled(X). */

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart