Re: [dev] [dwm] possible regression in 8806b6e

From: Hiltjo Posthuma <>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 10:50:25 +0200

On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 05:38:35PM +0100, Chris Down wrote:
> Hiltjo Posthuma writes:
> > Whats the similar issue exactly? Does this issue also happen when bisecting the
> > same commit (so its a also regression)?
> For 8806b6e23793 ("manage: propertynotify: Reduce cost of unused size
> hints"), the issue is that c->isfixed may not be set early, which might
> affect whether we intend to make the window floating or not.
> For bece862a0fc4 ("manage: For isfloating/oldstate check/set, ensure trans
> client actually exists"), the issue is that some non-SDL client which
> actually _should_ float have WM_TRANSIENT_FOR set to the root window. I
> posted about this on hackers_AT_ a few weeks ago.[0]
> For 8806b6e23793, I think the change I suggested should be sufficient, but
> would like to get confirmation from Ethan first and then will submit it as a
> proper patch.

Yes please

> For bece862a0fc4, I think it might just need to be reverted unless more
> specific logic can be applied, since it seems over the top to add more logic
> just to reliably distinguish SDL clients from other affected clients.

I've reverted the patch. It can be reworked to fix both issues (the regression and the initial
reason it was posted) maybe.

> In both cases the symptoms are that some subset of clients may not float
> when they should, but in the case of 8806b6e23793 it's "fixed" windows where
> the dimensions are fixed in size hints, and in the case of bece862a0fc4 it's
> windows with WM_TRANSIENT_FOR set to the root window (like the gpg2
> pinentry).
> 0:

Kind regards,

Received on Tue Apr 26 2022 - 10:50:25 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Apr 26 2022 - 11:00:08 CEST