| dsc_ | fine by me @ rtcom-accounts-ui, since mc-tool allows it | 00:52 |
|---|---|---|
| inky | https://www.linaro.org/blog/upstream-linux-support-now-available-for-the-the-qualcomm-snapdragon-8-gen-3-mobile-platform/ | 02:06 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: what is the username format for that tank thing? why do you need username to start with @? | 06:57 |
| freemangordon | ok, "They are in the format @username:homeserver.tld " | 06:59 |
| freemangordon | so, this needs username and server fields, no? | 06:59 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: so, I propose to introduce servername_separator property that defaults to '@' | 07:50 |
| freemangordon | that way you can enter matrix username properly | 07:52 |
| freemangordon | or, have separate username and server fields | 07:53 |
| freemangordon | where is matrix accounts-ui plugin code? | 07:53 |
| freemangordon | arno11: Wizzup: http://95.43.220.235/leste/hildon-desktop_2.2.194_armhf.deb | 09:28 |
| freemangordon | this renders launcher scrolling on n900 with > 40 fps, please test. If there are no regressions I'll push to -devel | 09:29 |
| freemangordon | on d4 fps increases from ~55 to ~75 | 09:34 |
| Wizzup | morning | 10:12 |
| Wizzup | so the problem for rtcom-accounts-ui is that the account indeed starts with an '@', so the 'full' address of the account is '@username:hostname.tld' | 10:12 |
| Wizzup | we could concievably skip validating it like sander said, and just have user be username nad the server be hostname.tld, but I don't think this makes sense since for example for jabber we force the account to be the 'user@hosntame.tld' | 10:13 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: so we have separate server and username fields already, btu the validation as far as I can see it, is done on the *account* property | 10:14 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: re: hd above, this should have a better saturation shader, or? | 10:14 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: or do you just test launcher scrolling? | 10:16 |
| freemangordon | saturation shader is the same | 10:16 |
| Wizzup | oh | 10:16 |
| freemangordon | but it is not applied on every frame ;) | 10:16 |
| Wizzup | ok, so this might still have the delay when starting start menu, or? | 10:17 |
| freemangordon | yes | 10:17 |
| Wizzup | or was that delay also the reason | 10:17 |
| Wizzup | ok | 10:17 |
| freemangordon | but scrolling is ok | 10:17 |
| freemangordon | start menu? | 10:17 |
| arno11 | freemangordon: launcher scrolling is ok now but the rest of the UI is still slow compared to no-blur | 10:17 |
| freemangordon | what is "rest of UI"? | 10:18 |
| Wizzup | start menu and hildon menu I think | 10:18 |
| arno11 | hsm, the 'opened window' menu | 10:18 |
| freemangordon | start menu == entering launcher? | 10:18 |
| freemangordon | please... | 10:18 |
| arno11 | in fact everywhere blur is visible | 10:18 |
| freemangordon | we have: | 10:18 |
| freemangordon | task navigator | 10:19 |
| freemangordon | launcher: | 10:19 |
| freemangordon | desktop edit | 10:19 |
| Wizzup | I meant to type status menu | 10:19 |
| freemangordon | and h-s-s menu | 10:19 |
| Wizzup | not start menu | 10:19 |
| freemangordon | *h-s-m | 10:19 |
| freemangordon | ok | 10:19 |
| Wizzup | but arno and I might be talking about different things too | 10:19 |
| arno11 | so...task navigator is slow | 10:19 |
| arno11 | and hsm and all sub menus | 10:19 |
| freemangordon | it is *slower* | 10:19 |
| freemangordon | no slow | 10:19 |
| freemangordon | for n900 25 fps is not *slow* | 10:20 |
| arno11 | it is under 25 fps and laggy | 10:20 |
| freemangordon | right | 10:20 |
| freemangordon | but it is the same in fremantle | 10:20 |
| Wizzup | and then from my side: the main pain point is the responsiveness of the status menu ,when you touch it, it can take 3-4 seconds for it to appear | 10:21 |
| arno11 | yes quite the same | 10:21 |
| Wizzup | same for the power menu | 10:21 |
| Wizzup | this went away with arno's transitions | 10:21 |
| freemangordon | it is not blur that makes it slow | 10:21 |
| freemangordon | because blur takes 250 ms (in theory) | 10:21 |
| Wizzup | indeed, but it's gone with the other transitions so it's not in h-s-m | 10:22 |
| freemangordon | sure, but we have to check which change makes it faster | 10:22 |
| Wizzup | yeah | 10:22 |
| freemangordon | but, first, lets confirm for few hours I did not regress something with those chages in h-d | 10:23 |
| Wizzup | I suspect because hsm is on top of something, maybe it takes time to snap it's current background and then blur it | 10:23 |
| Wizzup | but I might not understand how it works | 10:23 |
| freemangordon | will check | 10:23 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: but, I need my n900 booting :p | 10:24 |
| arno11 | freemangordon: imo hsm is quite ok compared to the task manager which is unresponsive (need to click 2-3 times to switch windows) | 10:28 |
| arno11 | and zoom animation is laggy | 10:28 |
| arno11 | huge diff with the launcher | 10:29 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: right | 10:29 |
| Wizzup | arno11: I don't have this unresponsiveness nithe task manager I think | 10:29 |
| Wizzup | I think what happens if you might click on a window before the animation is done? | 10:30 |
| arno11 | even if i wait, that's a lot slower than no-blur | 10:30 |
| freemangordon | arno11: I don;t see such issue with tasknav as well | 10:30 |
| arno11 | ok let me have a look again | 10:31 |
| freemangordon | but, my n900 battery went flat | 10:31 |
| freemangordon | so cant test ATM | 10:31 |
| freemangordon | have to run, ttyl | 10:31 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: ok, when you have some time, pls see my messages above re: matrix | 10:35 |
| arno11 | Wizzup: freemangordon: i took time to test and the changes are ok and improve things a bit compared to stock H-D and transitions. but still a way slower than no-blur (in term of speed and responsiveness) | 11:23 |
| arno11 | on my device with no blur and no overclock, the ui feels as fast as my redmi proot | 11:26 |
| dsc_ | < Wizzup> so the problem for rtcom-accounts-ui is that the account indeed starts with an '@', so the 'full' address of the account is '@username:hostname.tld' | 11:31 |
| dsc_ | the Matri *username* starts with @, not the mission-control account | 11:31 |
| dsc_ | afaik account can be anything | 11:31 |
| dsc_ | its just a rtcom UI display string | 11:32 |
| Wizzup | dsc_: yes, you said that yesterday and I touched on it above too | 11:38 |
| Wizzup | 10:13 < Wizzup> we could concievably skip validating it like sander said, and just have user be username nad the server be hostname.tld, but I don't think this makes sense since for example for jabber we force the account to be the 'user@hosntame.tld' | 11:38 |
| Wizzup | also the way the rtcom account plugins work the account param has to make sense | 11:39 |
| Wizzup | only in mc-tool it doesn't | 11:39 |
| Wizzup | note to self: fix the power button being used to unlock to then show the power menu | 11:40 |
| Wizzup | very annoying, I really press 'power off' bi accident more than a few times a month because uf it | 11:40 |
| dsc_ | Wizzup: for IRC it is idle/irc/accountname0 | 11:42 |
| dsc_ | from the top of my head | 11:42 |
| dsc_ | and not idle/irc/accountname@server.tld0 | 11:43 |
| dsc_ | right? | 11:43 |
| inky | folks, pmos has no forum to post there, and chat is silent about it, so anyway, i would like to share with you these screenshots, because uvos told me to check powertop status. i also tried to compare to powertop on maemo but the versions are very different, and powertop on maemo doesn't show percentages. | 11:51 |
| inky | https://xn--89ave6c.xn--cbbu1a.xn--y9a3aq:5281/upload/Lzh2weDodm2qYOrN-Td0kArT/1970-01-01_04:07:47.png | 11:51 |
| inky | https://xn--89ave6c.xn--cbbu1a.xn--y9a3aq:5281/upload/kMoCqJ4H3O9nxBs93JUqt0h6/2024-08-06_00:14:45.png | 11:51 |
| inky | https://xn--89ave6c.xn--cbbu1a.xn--y9a3aq:5281/upload/0OYqGNScaMJfKC8--585qD3P/2024-08-06_00:15:08.png | 11:51 |
| inky | so apparently constantly runtime-1c28000.serial, runtime-musb-hdrc.2.auto, runtime-1c28c00.serial runtime-1c22e00.codec, Radio device : hci_uart_h5. processes take 100% of cpu time each. in pmos. | 11:52 |
| sicelo | for pmos, you can make an issue on gitlab and post there, or in their matrix room (they have dozens) | 11:54 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: so, where is plugin code? | 11:55 |
| inky | oh! gitlab is an idea. matrix i don't use. maybe one day i could setup a xmpp gateway to it. but so far my experience with matrix was frustrating. | 11:55 |
| freemangordon | I think we can use current API with no changes, just by setting some properties | 11:55 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: please push to https://github.com/maemo-leste-extras/rtcom-accounts-plugin-matrix | 11:59 |
| freemangordon | hmm, seems 6.6 does not detect charger on boot | 12:04 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: ok, but the code isn't ready yet, but I'll push | 12:16 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: I will push, just a moment | 12:16 |
| freemangordon | yes, but I want to do some tweaks | 12:17 |
| Wizzup | I pushed | 12:17 |
| Wizzup | let me add a bit more code now, 1 minute | 12:17 |
| freemangordon | ok | 12:17 |
| freemangordon | ok, fremantle renders with 20 fps | 12:18 |
| Wizzup | I will get my n900 on serial now | 12:18 |
| freemangordon | ok | 12:19 |
| Wizzup | (will take 20-30 mins) | 12:19 |
| freemangordon | sure | 12:19 |
| freemangordon | arno11: so, fremantle renders with 20fps all over the place | 12:19 |
| dsc_ | what should I do with conversations today? | 12:20 |
| dsc_ | the media attachments stuff will probably take a while | 12:20 |
| Wizzup | dsc_: I think we should talk about new sms / new message | 12:20 |
| dsc_ | alright | 12:20 |
| Wizzup | and a way to resolve the mc 'account names' to more human readable names | 12:20 |
| freemangordon | arno11: so, my gut feeling tells me it feels faster becaue *gtk* renders way faster | 12:20 |
| Wizzup | this requires more osso-abook integration I think, for the new message / new sms | 12:21 |
| freemangordon | please, I want to finish connui-cell first | 12:21 |
| freemangordon | I have 2-3 days of work | 12:21 |
| dsc_ | new message -> spawn gtk contact dialog | 12:21 |
| freemangordon | mhm | 12:21 |
| arno11 | freemangordon: @20 fps, ok so not a surprise if i feel my device a way faster than fremantle then :D | 12:22 |
| freemangordon | I assume you'll want me to help | 12:22 |
| dsc_ | or maybe just open the contacts GUI and then click on people there? | 12:22 |
| arno11 | @gtk, ah ok | 12:22 |
| dsc_ | freemangordon: does it need to be embedded? | 12:22 |
| freemangordon | sure | 12:22 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: I pushed new code btw | 12:22 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: sure @ connui-cell :D | 12:22 |
| freemangordon | yeah, but I doubt I'll be able to do connui-cell, while doing conversations abook integration, while improving h-d performance :D | 12:23 |
| arno11 | the price of succes ;) | 12:24 |
| freemangordon | arno11: so, we have to fix gtk rendering | 12:24 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: feel free to pick whichever | 12:25 |
| dsc_ | you can just type like 3 sentences | 12:25 |
| dsc_ | and then ill do it | 12:25 |
| dsc_ | re: abook | 12:25 |
| dsc_ | but I dont know where to look currently | 12:25 |
| dsc_ | :D | 12:25 |
| dsc_ | #include <abook> | 12:25 |
| Wizzup | I think we can look at some of this dsc, but iirc we have to use dlsym and such to load in some gtk parts for the main loop integration | 12:25 |
| freemangordon | no, it is not that simple | 12:25 |
| freemangordon | yeah, as wizzup said | 12:26 |
| freemangordon | ok, lemme try to boot my n900 to downgrade the kernel | 12:26 |
| Wizzup | what do you want to test with downgrade | 12:27 |
| freemangordon | h-d rendering | 12:29 |
| Wizzup | hm, I doubt this changed? | 12:29 |
| Wizzup | what makes you think it changed? | 12:30 |
| freemangordon | yes, but I can boot ;) | 12:30 |
| Wizzup | ah. | 12:30 |
| dsc_ | ill go test some Matrix stuff some more | 12:37 |
| dsc_ | in the meantime :p | 12:37 |
| Wizzup | ok, I have serial going | 12:43 |
| Wizzup | let's see how this boot goes | 12:43 |
| freemangordon | btw, I have the feeling the hang is related to wifi | 12:44 |
| Wizzup | if you blacklist the module we can test that pretty easily I guess | 12:45 |
| freemangordon | yeah | 12:45 |
| freemangordon | lets see if you can get something on the setial first | 12:45 |
| Wizzup | I am struggling to get my n900 in a position where it doesn't lose power through the pins when I touch it, hang on. | 12:51 |
| freemangordon | or there is something wring with charger driver | 12:52 |
| freemangordon | *wrong | 12:52 |
| Wizzup | no, it's clearly contact | 12:54 |
| Wizzup | for me it looks like swap is started about 30 seconds in, at least last boot | 12:55 |
| Wizzup | [ 36.180053] ext2 filesystem being mounted at /boot supports timestamps until 2038-01-19 (0x7fffffff) | 12:56 |
| Wizzup | [ 36.464538] Adding 1048572k swap on /swap. Priority:-2 extents:10 across:1294336k SS | 12:56 |
| arno11 | i can confirm (from device logs), around 30-35 sec | 12:57 |
| arno11 | *always around | 12:57 |
| Wizzup | last message is iphb being loaded | 12:59 |
| Wizzup | then devices is frozen | 12:59 |
| Wizzup | device is frozen | 12:59 |
| arno11 | same for me (from logs) | 12:59 |
| Wizzup | have you tried to blacklist iphd? | 12:59 |
| Wizzup | iphb | 12:59 |
| arno11 | nope | 12:59 |
| Wizzup | I will boot again but I might try that next | 13:00 |
| arno11 | (good idea, but difficult for me to reproduce since i'm able to boot 75% of time now) | 13:01 |
| arno11 | ok | 13:01 |
| freemangordon | how is iphb related? | 13:02 |
| Wizzup | just the last thing that is on serial | 13:02 |
| arno11 | but even if there is no freeze, iphb is the last msg from boot | 13:02 |
| Wizzup | ok | 13:02 |
| Wizzup | then serial seems useless | 13:02 |
| arno11 | probably | 13:02 |
| arno11 | the probs arrive when H-D is loading | 13:03 |
| Wizzup | so what did you try so far, you tried to remove some things from starting throug the xsession? | 13:04 |
| arno11 | yes i tried almost every combinations lol | 13:04 |
| freemangordon | oh, wpasupplicant in backports? | 13:05 |
| Wizzup | well I can confirm that the ts stopped responding when iphb was loaded | 13:05 |
| Wizzup | but there's more messages | 13:06 |
| Wizzup | [ 179.888946] iphb: loading out-of-tree module taints kernel. | 13:06 |
| Wizzup | [ 179.925872] iphb: Keepalive handler module registered | 13:06 |
| Wizzup | [ 183.210479] omap-mcbsp 49022000.mcbsp: TX Buffer Overflow! | 13:06 |
| Wizzup | [ 184.939208] omap-mcbsp 49022000.mcbsp: TX Buffer Overflow! | 13:06 |
| Wizzup | [ 185.063568] omap-mcbsp 49022000.mcbsp: TX Buffer Overflow! | 13:06 |
| Wizzup | and those keep coming | 13:06 |
| Wizzup | might not be the real cause though | 13:06 |
| freemangordon | yeah, I saw that too | 13:07 |
| Wizzup | but it's not a kernel panic at least it seems | 13:07 |
| freemangordon | could be related | 13:07 |
| freemangordon | but should not happen, no? | 13:07 |
| Wizzup | I will make some lunch and leave it in this state | 13:07 |
| freemangordon | lemme downgrade | 13:07 |
| Wizzup | I don't know, I think I've probably seen it before | 13:07 |
| Wizzup | I also don't remember what mcbsp is :) | 13:07 |
| Wizzup | I think openrc doesn't log to serial after a certain time | 13:08 |
| freemangordon | audio | 13:08 |
| Wizzup | ok, so that could just be responding to the ts touch | 13:08 |
| Wizzup | it happens mostly when I touch the ts | 13:08 |
| Wizzup | so that could be m-i-s | 13:08 |
| freemangordon | yes, but should not cause device to hard lock :) | 13:09 |
| freemangordon | oh, we don;t have 6.1 anymore? | 13:09 |
| Wizzup | arno11: did you try to remove any of your sysctl swap related things? | 13:09 |
| freemangordon | :( | 13:09 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: we do in stable | 13:09 |
| freemangordon | it is 6.1.8 there | 13:09 |
| freemangordon | but ok | 13:09 |
| arno11 | Wizzup: yep, already tried | 13:10 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: this looks like either hard device lock or endless loop in kernel | 13:10 |
| freemangordon | allso, once booted, it never locks | 13:13 |
| arno11 | Wizzup: atm what is working @75% of time: blocking modest (network troubles related ?) and loading custom vm from userspace. | 13:15 |
| arno11 | freemangordon: if it boots fine it is really stable | 13:15 |
| freemangordon | yes | 13:15 |
| freemangordon | so, it is some driver that hangs it | 13:15 |
| freemangordon | I guess we shall blacklist all and enable one by one | 13:16 |
| freemangordon | though, if it is sgx nothing will help | 13:16 |
| Wizzup | well it's not hanging | 13:20 |
| Wizzup | serial shows kernel as alive | 13:20 |
| Wizzup | so I would not rule out OOM yet | 13:20 |
| arno11 | ah | 13:20 |
| Wizzup | I can't get a shell though | 13:20 |
| Wizzup | [ 1100.258697] omap-mcbsp 49022000.mcbsp: TX Buffer Overflow! | 13:20 |
| Wizzup | but that's still going | 13:20 |
| freemangordon | is it not? | 13:26 |
| freemangordon | hmm | 13:26 |
| freemangordon | ugh | 13:26 |
| freemangordon | it just hanged with 6.1 | 13:26 |
| freemangordon | so OOM | 13:26 |
| freemangordon | but how's that possible given there is swap? | 13:27 |
| arno11 | (the issue first appeared with 6.1.48 iirc btw) | 13:27 |
| freemangordon | this is 6.1.8 | 13:27 |
| Wizzup | arno11: what is your swap size | 13:28 |
| arno11 | 2 x 1GB actually | 13:28 |
| freemangordon | it was booting happily with 768MiB on emmc | 13:29 |
| Wizzup | that is fine, but if it is related to oom then this is a good thing to look into @ happily | 13:29 |
| Wizzup | what if we install earlyoom or something? | 13:29 |
| Wizzup | (as test) | 13:30 |
| Wizzup | I am booting again | 13:30 |
| freemangordon | how is swap enabled? | 13:30 |
| freemangordon | fstab | 13:32 |
| arno11 | (it was booting happily with emmc only for a short period btw) | 13:32 |
| arno11 | yes fstab | 13:32 |
| freemangordon | with 6.1 I had no issues whatsoever | 13:32 |
| freemangordon | I'll revert swap to emmc to see if it fixes boot issue | 13:34 |
| arno11 | i already tried | 13:34 |
| arno11 | same story | 13:34 |
| freemangordon | and? | 13:34 |
| freemangordon | with 6.1? | 13:35 |
| arno11 | yes | 13:35 |
| freemangordon | so we run OOM with swap? | 13:35 |
| freemangordon | that does not make sense | 13:35 |
| arno11 | 6.1 or 6.6, same boot issues | 13:35 |
| arno11 | like i said, first troubles appeared with 6.1 and emmc 7 months ago | 13:36 |
| freemangordon | but, now it failed to boot with 6.1.8 | 13:36 |
| freemangordon | do you say this is something userland? | 13:36 |
| arno11 | yes | 13:36 |
| freemangordon | could it be VM settings related? | 13:36 |
| arno11 | i already tried to remove them | 13:37 |
| freemangordon | ok, seems Wizzup has some ideas | 13:37 |
| arno11 | ok | 13:37 |
| Wizzup | booted ok this time | 13:38 |
| Wizzup | when h-d started I used the slider to turn off the screen | 13:38 |
| Wizzup | not sure if it is related | 13:38 |
| arno11 | hard to say, the issue is so random, difficult to say what helps or not, until 4-5 reboots | 13:40 |
| freemangordon | ok, does not boot with 6.1 and swap on emmc | 13:40 |
| freemangordon | lemme revert VM settings | 13:41 |
| Wizzup | right there is /etc/sysctl.d/n900-perf.conf.leste | 13:41 |
| freemangordon | mhm | 13:41 |
| Wizzup | well without .leste | 13:41 |
| freemangordon | umm.... | 13:43 |
| freemangordon | could you have a look at /var/lib/n900-pm? | 13:44 |
| Wizzup | do you mena /etc/init.d/n900-pm? | 13:45 |
| Wizzup | I don't see /var/lib/n900-opm | 13:45 |
| freemangordon | sorry, /var/log | 13:46 |
| Wizzup | I don't have this file | 13:47 |
| Wizzup | btw, /etc/init.d/leste-config has code to change nr_requests for mmcblk0/1, wonder if this is related to emmc slowness | 13:47 |
| freemangordon | how's that? | 13:47 |
| freemangordon | oh, does it? | 13:47 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: what writes this file for you in /var/log/ | 13:48 |
| freemangordon | no idea | 13:48 |
| freemangordon | I guess it is /etc/init.d/n900-pm | 13:48 |
| freemangordon | oh, maybe this is sopmething I have to remove | 13:48 |
| Wizzup | I don't think we have a n900 pm package yet | 13:49 |
| Wizzup | since starting it causes lot sof problems | 13:49 |
| Wizzup | so you file you probably made by yourself | 13:49 |
| arno11 | i already tried to remove nr_request | 13:49 |
| arno11 | true for n900-pm | 13:49 |
| arno11 | i meant the nr_request stuff from leste-config | 13:51 |
| arno11 | in fact i tried to remove almost every custom n900 stuff, with no more succes on boot | 13:54 |
| arno11 | the real question for me is why this issue happens randomly. why so much diff between boots | 13:55 |
| freemangordon | first boot after removing custom VM stuff here (and nr_requests) is ok | 13:55 |
| arno11 | for me too (sometimes), but you must try to reboot 3-4 times to be sure | 13:56 |
| freemangordon | sure will do | 13:56 |
| arno11 | ok | 13:56 |
| freemangordon | also, to improve responsiveness we shall put h-d (and systemui) in a special cgroup | 13:58 |
| freemangordon | that's what fremantle does | 13:58 |
| arno11 | ah ok interesting | 13:58 |
| arno11 | for nr request and vm, the issue appeared long time before btw | 13:59 |
| arno11 | for cgroup: maybe that's why TS latency feels better | 14:00 |
| freemangordon | mhm | 14:00 |
| arno11 | *on fremantle | 14:00 |
| Wizzup | I would like to use cgroups yes :) | 14:00 |
| arno11 | bbl | 14:01 |
| freemangordon | second boot in a row, no issue whatsoever | 14:04 |
| freemangordon | lemm eupgrade the kernel | 14:04 |
| Wizzup | it might be worth installing earlyoom, it's a daemon that will kill processes if you get near oom | 14:06 |
| Wizzup | (for debugging) | 14:06 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: I don;t think we have OOM | 14:07 |
| freemangordon | but lemme confirm it | 14:07 |
| freemangordon | upgrading to 6.6 now, lemme see if it will boot ok | 14:08 |
| freemangordon | with default VM settings/nr_requests | 14:08 |
| arno11 | sometimes i get 6 freezes with default vm and nr request btw | 14:09 |
| arno11 | *6-8 freezes | 14:09 |
| freemangordon | on boot? | 14:09 |
| arno11 | but with 6.6 | 14:09 |
| arno11 | don't remember exactly with 6.1 | 14:10 |
| arno11 | bbl | 14:10 |
| freemangordon | 66 boots fine too | 14:23 |
| Wizzup | maybe try a few more times for good measure | 14:24 |
| Wizzup | I will also try | 14:24 |
| freemangordon | will do | 14:24 |
| Wizzup | I will try too | 14:25 |
| Wizzup | btw, looks like maybe sapwood-server is not stopped properly and tries to restart while rebooting | 14:27 |
| Wizzup | same for him | 14:27 |
| Wizzup | but I did type 'reboot' in ssh, so.. | 14:28 |
| freemangordon | might | 14:30 |
| freemangordon | be | 14:30 |
| freemangordon | that could be the reason for slow reboot/poweroff | 14:30 |
| freemangordon | second boot in a row with no issue, 6.6 | 14:33 |
| Wizzup | trying to boot with sysctl and nr_requests disabled too | 14:35 |
| arno11 | looking @irc logs, i asked to remove custom vm stuff few weeks ago, because it seems to help on boot, and enabling them from usersspace causes no issue and speed up things. but definitely not the root cause | 14:37 |
| arno11 | i currently boot without them for a while but still get troubles | 14:38 |
| freemangordon | what troubles? | 14:38 |
| arno11 | freezes | 14:38 |
| freemangordon | temporal? | 14:39 |
| arno11 | nope | 14:39 |
| freemangordon | can;t repro here | 14:39 |
| arno11 | same troubles as usual | 14:39 |
| freemangordon | did you remove nr_requests change? | 14:39 |
| arno11 | yes | 14:39 |
| arno11 | uh, actually not | 14:40 |
| freemangordon | I think it is nr_requests | 14:40 |
| freemangordon | that breaks it | 14:40 |
| arno11 | iirc i got freeze without it but it was better | 14:40 |
| arno11 | could explain at least emmc troubles | 14:41 |
| Wizzup | first boot was good for me too | 14:41 |
| arno11 | let me try as well | 14:41 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: BTW, if we renice Xorg h-d and system-ui to some sane priorities, we get a very responsive system | 14:46 |
| Wizzup | did you try this with renice, or? | 14:47 |
| freemangordon | yes | 14:47 |
| Wizzup | ok | 14:48 |
| freemangordon | fremantle does something through ohm/cgroups/nice | 14:48 |
| Wizzup | https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/OpenRC/CGroups#Activating_cgroup_feature_support | 14:48 |
| Wizzup | we might need to enable some cgroup stuff in kernel if not already | 14:49 |
| freemangordon | at least Xorg is stared with dsmetool -n 8, but I am not sure what 'nice 8' means to dsme | 14:49 |
| freemangordon | we already have some cgroups support | 14:49 |
| freemangordon | but I have no idea how to use it | 14:49 |
| Wizzup | what do you mean 'we already have some cgroups support' | 14:49 |
| freemangordon | see /sys/fs/cgroup | 14:50 |
| Wizzup | ok, I see what you mean | 14:50 |
| freemangordon | elogind does things | 14:50 |
| Wizzup | ok, I think we should do this through openrc | 14:51 |
| Wizzup | but I will check kernel | 14:51 |
| freemangordon | ok | 14:51 |
| freemangordon | anyway, I think nr_requests shall be removed | 14:51 |
| freemangordon | lemme check VM stuff | 14:51 |
| Wizzup | agree @ nr_requests | 14:51 |
| Wizzup | I have two good boots as wlel so far | 14:51 |
| Wizzup | # CONFIG_BLK_CGROUP_IOLATENCY is not set | 14:52 |
| Wizzup | # CONFIG_BLK_CGROUP_IOCOST is not set | 14:52 |
| Wizzup | # CONFIG_BLK_CGROUP_IOPRIO is not set | 14:52 |
| Wizzup | # CONFIG_BFQ_CGROUP_DEBUG is not set | 14:52 |
| Wizzup | # CONFIG_CGROUP_PIDS is not set | 14:52 |
| Wizzup | # CONFIG_CGROUP_RDMA is not set | 14:52 |
| Wizzup | others are set | 14:52 |
| freemangordon | maybe we want CONFIG_BLK_CGROUP_IOPRIO | 14:52 |
| Wizzup | we have this: | 14:52 |
| Wizzup | CONFIG_CGROUP_FREEZER=y | 14:52 |
| Wizzup | CONFIG_CGROUP_DEVICE=y | 14:52 |
| Wizzup | CONFIG_CGROUP_CPUACCT=y | 14:52 |
| Wizzup | CONFIG_CGROUP_PERF=y | 14:52 |
| freemangordon | sounds like something useful :) | 14:52 |
| Wizzup | CONFIG_CGROUP_WRITEBACK=y | 14:52 |
| Wizzup | CONFIG_CGROUP_SCHED=y | 14:52 |
| Wizzup | so we can play with some other stuff first maybe | 14:52 |
| freemangordon | yeah | 14:52 |
| freemangordon | have to check what fremantle does | 14:53 |
| Wizzup | we should decide what goes in what I think | 14:53 |
| freemangordon | we may want to either take ohmd or see if we can achieve the same in elogind | 14:53 |
| freemangordon | well, we already have fremantle settings | 14:53 |
| Wizzup | what are they? | 14:54 |
| Wizzup | I also think nr requests should go | 14:55 |
| Wizzup | will reboot again but two successes in a row so far | 14:55 |
| Wizzup | and previously it failed 4 times in a row | 14:55 |
| Wizzup | I also removed sysfs | 14:55 |
| freemangordon | see /usr/share/policy/etc/rx51 | 14:55 |
| freemangordon | syspart.conf | 14:57 |
| freemangordon | I don;t know if elogind implements systemd cgroups support | 14:57 |
| Wizzup | on fremantle? | 14:58 |
| freemangordon | no, in devuan | 14:58 |
| freemangordon | in fremantle it is ohmd plugin that does the job | 14:58 |
| Wizzup | I meant /usr/share/policy/etc/rx51 | 14:58 |
| freemangordon | yes | 14:58 |
| freemangordon | syspart.conf | 14:58 |
| Wizzup | on fremantle | 14:58 |
| freemangordon | yes | 14:58 |
| Wizzup | ok | 14:58 |
| freemangordon | /usr/share/policy/etc/rx51/syspart.conf on fremantle | 14:59 |
| freemangordon | so, if elogind is not able to distribute processes to various cgroups based on some rules, we shoudl either take ohmd or bite the bullet and go to systemd | 14:59 |
| freemangordon | unless I am missing something | 15:00 |
| Wizzup | ok, my fremantle has been off for weeks | 15:01 |
| Wizzup | let me try | 15:01 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: why? | 15:01 |
| Wizzup | why not use openrc? | 15:01 |
| Wizzup | we have it right now | 15:01 |
| freemangordon | how would it distribute user started processes? | 15:02 |
| freemangordon | like, the ones from the launcher? | 15:02 |
| freemangordon | or based on executable? | 15:02 |
| arno11 | seems ok for me too (on boot) :) | 15:02 |
| Wizzup | 3/3 so far | 15:04 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: I will check | 15:04 |
| freemangordon | ugh, page-cluster == 8?!? | 15:05 |
| freemangordon | this is 2^8 pages | 15:05 |
| freemangordon | why is that? | 15:05 |
| Wizzup | https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PaxControlGroups/ | 15:06 |
| Wizzup | it looks like cgroups more recently has been taken over by systemd | 15:06 |
| freemangordon | yes, and IIUC all that code is disabled in elogind | 15:06 |
| Wizzup | gotta love these people | 15:06 |
| freemangordon | arno11: why is page-cluster 8? | 15:07 |
| freemangordon | this is 128KiB IIUC | 15:07 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: in any case /sys/fs/cgroup is well populated with both openrc and elogind, so I think we can at least test this relatively easily | 15:07 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: it is populated, bu we have no idea how | 15:08 |
| Wizzup | what do you mean? | 15:08 |
| Wizzup | most of this is set up by kernel initially | 15:08 |
| freemangordon | how do you assign process to cgroup? | 15:08 |
| arno11 | freemangordon: see issue 737, cssu/tmo stuff | 15:08 |
| Wizzup | the only thing I see is elogind directory with my ssh login cgroup | 15:08 |
| Wizzup | that's it | 15:08 |
| Wizzup | https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/cgroup-v2.html | 15:09 |
| freemangordon | so, who says that h-d shall have higher CPU shares that let's say a browser? | 15:09 |
| Wizzup | A process can be migrated into a cgroup by writing its PID to the target cgroup’s “cgroup.procs” file. Only one process can be migrated on a single write(2) call. If a process is composed of multiple threads, writing the PID of any thread migrates all threads of the process. | 15:09 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: that's clear | 15:10 |
| Wizzup | seems to me like dsme and openrc should just put the processes in their right cgroup | 15:10 |
| Wizzup | and that's it | 15:10 |
| freemangordon | the question is - who moves processes between cgroups and based on what criteria? | 15:10 |
| Wizzup | nobody moves things, you just assign them at start | 15:10 |
| freemangordon | based on? | 15:10 |
| Wizzup | on what starts it? | 15:10 |
| Wizzup | and what is started? | 15:10 |
| freemangordon | no, that won;t fly | 15:11 |
| Wizzup | in any case I suggest we defer this until later - connui-cell, rtcom accounts, etc | 15:11 |
| freemangordon | how do you assigh mediaplayer higher prio that ssh? | 15:11 |
| Wizzup | that's something that is true for any cgroup software, systemd or not | 15:11 |
| freemangordon | arno11: so, because I was there, I cna assure you that the *only* thing that maskes sense to change is swappiness | 15:11 |
| Wizzup | it could perhaps be based on .desktop or something, but we weren't talking about OMP | 15:11 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: with systemd you can assign rules baesd on which to move process to a cgroup | 15:12 |
| arno11 | freemangordon: ok i trust you | 15:12 |
| Wizzup | link? | 15:12 |
| freemangordon | the same with fremantle/ohmd | 15:12 |
| Wizzup | so cgconfig? | 15:12 |
| Wizzup | https://manpages.debian.org/testing/cgroup-tools/cgrules.conf.5.en.html | 15:13 |
| Wizzup | this is not part of systemd | 15:13 |
| freemangordon | sec | 15:13 |
| Wizzup | https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/cgroup-tools | 15:13 |
| Wizzup | https://github.com/mk-fg/cgroup-tools | 15:13 |
| freemangordon | see https://www.redhat.com/sysadmin/cgroups-part-four | 15:14 |
| Wizzup | yes, systemd incorporated will push for systemd incorporated | 15:14 |
| Wizzup | so will you make a .service for OMP? | 15:14 |
| freemangordon | the point is that you can manage processes | 15:14 |
| Wizzup | what you just linked is exactly what openrc can do *now* | 15:15 |
| freemangordon | did you look at the syspart.conf? | 15:15 |
| Wizzup | no, I have not started fremantle yet | 15:15 |
| Wizzup | please look at the cgroup-tools that I linked | 15:15 |
| Wizzup | since it seems to be what you asked | 15:15 |
| freemangordon | lemme check | 15:15 |
| freemangordon | "These scripts are useless on a modern linux with unified cgroup-v2 hierarchy." | 15:16 |
| freemangordon | :D | 15:16 |
| Wizzup | no | 15:16 |
| Wizzup | with *systemd* | 15:16 |
| Wizzup | as far as I read it | 15:17 |
| freemangordon | ok, this https://manpages.debian.org/testing/cgroup-tools/cgrules.conf.5.en.html *looks* like what we need | 15:18 |
| Wizzup | if it works with v2 then yes | 15:19 |
| Wizzup | looks like you're right and it doesn't work on v2 | 15:19 |
| Wizzup | I think we can pick if we want v1 or v2, but yeah | 15:19 |
| arno11 | freemangordon: which renice value did you use for h-d, Xorg and system-ui btw ? | 15:20 |
| freemangordon | -8 for h-d and Xorg | 15:22 |
| freemangordon | -19 for mce and system-ui | 15:22 |
| freemangordon | but that was just for test | 15:22 |
| arno11 | ok thx | 15:22 |
| freemangordon | I guess -8 for all should be fine | 15:23 |
| freemangordon | or even higher | 15:23 |
| arno11 | ok | 15:23 |
| arno11 | i'll try in a bit | 15:24 |
| freemangordon | also, we shall revert swap to emmc | 15:27 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: did you check if it works? | 15:27 |
| freemangordon | yes | 15:28 |
| freemangordon | I am booting all the time with swap on emmc | 15:28 |
| Wizzup | so its not slow for you compared to mmc? | 15:28 |
| Wizzup | sd card is faster for me | 15:28 |
| Wizzup | (and has more ram) | 15:28 |
| Wizzup | well, swap | 15:28 |
| freemangordon | how do you measure it? | 15:28 |
| Wizzup | it was unusable with emmc :) | 15:28 |
| Wizzup | literally | 15:28 |
| freemangordon | well, with nr_requests=512 | 15:29 |
| Wizzup | why not both, btw? | 15:29 |
| Wizzup | btw, no need for serial anymore, yeah? | 15:30 |
| freemangordon | because to my understanding there is no way RW on the same device to be faster than R on device a and W on device 2 | 15:30 |
| freemangordon | no need | 15:30 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: that depends if there is i/o load or not | 15:30 |
| freemangordon | there is always io load when you start a program | 15:30 |
| freemangordon | ugh, managed to start chromium on n900 :) | 15:31 |
| Wizzup | bbl | 15:34 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: let me know if you want me to make leste-config-n900 changes and let me know what to keep in sysctl | 15:34 |
| Wizzup | the block requetss will just go | 15:34 |
| freemangordon | I think we shall keep just swappiness | 15:35 |
| arno11 | swappiness is already =60 by default iirc | 15:36 |
| freemangordon | so all shall go then | 15:36 |
| freemangordon | unless you have hard evidence that a particular setting improves responsiveness or startup times or whatever | 15:36 |
| freemangordon | bbl | 15:37 |
| arno11 | again, i already asked weeks ago to remove stuff, so...totally agree :P | 15:38 |
| Wizzup | ok, cool | 15:39 |
| Wizzup | will do when I get back | 15:39 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: btw, what about forcing 500mhz as min freq | 15:41 |
| Wizzup | in dts or otherwise | 15:41 |
| freemangordon | why? | 15:42 |
| Wizzup | since it's so much more responsive | 15:42 |
| Wizzup | and doesn't cost power | 15:42 |
| freemangordon | is it? | 15:42 |
| Wizzup | ye | 15:42 |
| freemangordon | lemme check | 15:42 |
| arno11 | yes really no change in power usage | 15:42 |
| arno11 | even better | 15:42 |
| Wizzup | bbiab | 15:43 |
| arno11 | 500-550-600 seems really ideal imo | 15:44 |
| freemangordon | ttyl | 15:45 |
| arno11 | wow...@805MHz with hd, xorg and systemui reniced, we can't say anymore n900 is slow lol | 15:51 |
| Wizzup | what renice did you use? | 15:52 |
| arno11 | -8 | 15:53 |
| arno11 | for h-d, xorg and systemui | 15:53 |
| arno11 | (and no blur) | 15:54 |
| arno11 | bbl | 16:03 |
| arno11 | ok, i'm able to speed up things with fmg shader stuff, tweaking transitions again | 16:49 |
| arno11 | now task nav is very fast | 16:50 |
| arno11 | h-s-m as well | 16:50 |
| arno11 | the key is to decrease radius and modify animations time again when blur is enable | 16:52 |
| arno11 | it is still 'a bit' slower than no-blur but really acceptable imo | 16:54 |
| Wizzup | sweet, can you share it | 16:55 |
| arno11 | if you want to try it now: radius and radius_more = 3 (or 1) and | 16:57 |
| arno11 | [popup] duration_in and out = 100 | 16:58 |
| arno11 | *in [home] for radius | 16:58 |
| arno11 | (no need to restart H-D) | 16:59 |
| arno11 | with that, you can even switch between windows in task nav before the end of the zoom animation (with blur) | 17:00 |
| freemangordon | dsc_: Wizzup: what the? https://github.com/maemo-leste/conversations/blob/master/src/lib/tp.cpp#L283 | 17:38 |
| dsc_ | freemangordon: how much time do you have? ^^ | 17:39 |
| freemangordon | I want to see if I can help with account plugin | 17:40 |
| freemangordon | otherwise I have some time | 17:40 |
| dsc_ | explaining that room name thing has to do with how -tank works right now | 17:40 |
| dsc_ | due to some shortcomings in Telepathy some hacky stuff was done | 17:40 |
| dsc_ | which is described in this document: https://plak.infrapuin.nl/selif/bdxo2zx1.txt | 17:40 |
| dsc_ | under "possible solutions" number 4 was chosen | 17:41 |
| dsc_ | this, ultimately, has the requirement that TextChannels are always passed on *with* room name | 17:41 |
| dsc_ | because room name represents the Matrix room alias | 17:41 |
| dsc_ | on the conversations side we need both alias and underlying ID | 17:43 |
| dsc_ | at all times | 17:43 |
| freemangordon | hows's that? you can;t connect by ID only? | 17:44 |
| freemangordon | if that's the case, I would say there is an issue in the manager | 17:45 |
| dsc_ | nope its not possible | 17:45 |
| freemangordon | however, my point is that hardcoding protocol-specific support in conversations is bad | 17:45 |
| dsc_ | its not how matrix works basically | 17:45 |
| freemangordon | but then id is alias+id, no? | 17:45 |
| freemangordon | IIRC room id (or user id in that regard) should unique identify the resource in question | 17:46 |
| freemangordon | if that's not the case, then mamager is broken | 17:46 |
| freemangordon | manager | 17:46 |
| dsc_ | no Matrix is broken :P | 17:46 |
| freemangordon | ok, lemme re-red that wall of text | 17:46 |
| dsc_ | yes | 17:47 |
| dsc_ | as I said, how much time do you have | 17:47 |
| freemangordon | some time | 17:47 |
| dsc_ | 1. joinchannel from Conversations by alias | 17:47 |
| dsc_ | 2. libquotient creates a channel (async, which is a problem but lets forget that) | 17:47 |
| dsc_ | 3. libquotient returns a Room object without any room alias | 17:48 |
| dsc_ | 4. after 2 seconds or so, the Matrix protocol will send the alias event | 17:48 |
| dsc_ | (so I had to wait for that in the manager) | 17:48 |
| dsc_ | actually | 17:48 |
| dsc_ | this is not something to discuss on IRC | 17:48 |
| freemangordon | umm, why? | 17:48 |
| dsc_ | because I will post an unreadable wall of text | 17:49 |
| freemangordon | ah | 17:49 |
| dsc_ | i want time to sketch out situations | 17:49 |
| freemangordon | so, wait a bit | 17:49 |
| dsc_ | its very complicated | 17:49 |
| freemangordon | you say you have async event from Matrix, right | 17:49 |
| freemangordon | ? | 17:49 |
| dsc_ | sure | 17:49 |
| dsc_ | everything is async, also the creation of rooms | 17:50 |
| freemangordon | so, what is the issue with posting "channelEnsured" as async event too, when you have the alias? | 17:50 |
| dsc_ | im not following | 17:50 |
| dsc_ | when joining a channel from conversations, it is by alias, and it calls `ensureTextChannels` (I think) | 17:51 |
| freemangordon | dsc_: ok, this will take time (as you said), lemme first try to help with accounts ui applet | 17:51 |
| dsc_ | and in the manager, it wants a TextChannel back | 17:51 |
| freemangordon | lets spend some time tomorrow on that | 17:51 |
| dsc_ | which is not possible, because the creation of rooms is async | 17:51 |
| dsc_ | as well as waiting for the room state | 17:51 |
| freemangordon | I am still not convinced that's the case | 17:52 |
| freemangordon | but I want to look at the code first | 17:52 |
| freemangordon | but not now, as account ui plugin is easier | 17:52 |
| dsc_ | alright | 17:53 |
| dsc_ | but above we are talking about async stuff | 17:59 |
| dsc_ | which is actually seperate from requiring room alias over at conversations (maybe) | 17:59 |
| dsc_ | the reason is, because Matrix wants you to use a room alias everywhere | 18:00 |
| dsc_ | if I remember correctly | 18:00 |
| dsc_ | e.g: create a channel (by alias), close conversations, join by ID <== failure | 18:00 |
| dsc_ | so | 18:03 |
| dsc_ | we can have a "meeting" about this tomorrow :P | 18:03 |
| freemangordon | yes | 18:03 |
| dsc_ | i will need to prepare all the relevant information, because its very complex | 18:03 |
| freemangordon | how do I register with matrix? | 18:03 |
| dsc_ | matrix is complicated protocol, and telepathy is a complicated framework :P | 18:03 |
| dsc_ | here: | 18:03 |
| dsc_ | https://chat.utwente.io/ | 18:03 |
| freemangordon | "Your browser can't run Element" | 18:04 |
| dsc_ | but honestly I will just leave the code as it is | 18:04 |
| freemangordon | WTF is that? | 18:04 |
| dsc_ | you can fix it, sure | 18:04 |
| dsc_ | freemangordon: what browser? | 18:04 |
| freemangordon | FF | 18:04 |
| dsc_ | im also on FF | 18:04 |
| freemangordon | a bit older, but still | 18:04 |
| freemangordon | 91esr | 18:04 |
| dsc_ | 128.0 | 18:05 |
| dsc_ | ok freemangordon simple question | 18:06 |
| dsc_ | conversations does `ensureTextChatroom()` | 18:06 |
| dsc_ | `createChannelCB()` needs to return a connection, that wraps a Tp::TextChannel | 18:06 |
| dsc_ | so when we do join `#test:utwente.io` | 18:07 |
| dsc_ | which is an async call | 18:07 |
| dsc_ | how do we return a valid TextChannel | 18:07 |
| freemangordon | it returns PendingChannelRequest * | 18:07 |
| freemangordon | which you can use to wait for async completion | 18:08 |
| freemangordon | it will emit finished() when pending operation has completed | 18:08 |
| dsc_ | Tp::BaseChannelPtr MatrixConnection::createChannelCB(const QVariantMap &request, Tp::DBusError *error) | 18:08 |
| dsc_ | return type is Tp::BaseChannelPtr | 18:09 |
| freemangordon | lemme check | 18:09 |
| freemangordon | where is the code? | 18:09 |
| dsc_ | this one https://github.com/maemo-leste-upstream-forks/telepathy-tank/blob/2a72331767d6691e7876e4f7c4ff6bc280f23af2/src/connection.cpp#L294 | 18:09 |
| dsc_ | the `PendingChannelRequest` you're talking about is from the perspective of conversations | 18:09 |
| freemangordon | yes | 18:09 |
| dsc_ | which does a dbus call, which is always async yes | 18:09 |
| dsc_ | so its pending | 18:09 |
| freemangordon | so, there *must* be a way to do it in async way from the manager | 18:10 |
| dsc_ | but on the manager side its sync | 18:10 |
| dsc_ | well i hope ^^ | 18:10 |
| dsc_ | https://github.com/TelepathyIM/telepathy-qt/issues/5 | 18:10 |
| dsc_ | > Telepathy-Morse also needs to delay Connection.Interface.Requests CreateChannel() to get a native identifier of created group chat. | 18:10 |
| dsc_ | we have the same issue as he describes | 18:10 |
| freemangordon | also, you can always block in event loop | 18:11 |
| dsc_ | "wait for something in CreateChannel" | 18:11 |
| dsc_ | yes im blocking right now | 18:11 |
| freemangordon | where? | 18:11 |
| dsc_ | well, its actually not a true block, you introduce a nested event loop | 18:11 |
| dsc_ | sorry wrong branch, sec | 18:11 |
| freemangordon | yes, that's what I mean | 18:11 |
| freemangordon | QEventLoop | 18:11 |
| dsc_ | https://github.com/maemo-leste-upstream-forks/telepathy-tank/blob/maemo/chimaera-devel/src/connection.cpp#L355 | 18:11 |
| dsc_ | the sync stuff is above that | 18:12 |
| freemangordon | in createRoomSync I guess | 18:13 |
| freemangordon | so, I don;t see any issue with that | 18:13 |
| freemangordon | just wait until you get the alias from Matrix | 18:13 |
| freemangordon | also, I don;t understand how 1to1 is a room | 18:14 |
| dsc_ | heh' | 18:14 |
| dsc_ | it is | 18:14 |
| freemangordon | what defines room as a room? | 18:14 |
| dsc_ | RoomType IIRC | 18:14 |
| dsc_ | on the libquotient side, that is | 18:14 |
| Wizzup | well, in matrix it is | 18:14 |
| dsc_ | on the telepathy side, its handletype | 18:14 |
| freemangordon | handletype is either contact or room, no? | 18:15 |
| dsc_ | yes | 18:15 |
| freemangordon | ah, I think I see what you mean | 18:15 |
| freemangordon | for TP there is a difference, for Matrix it is always MUC, right? | 18:15 |
| freemangordon | so, I assume by 'room' you mean MUC, correct? | 18:16 |
| dsc_ | right exactly | 18:17 |
| dsc_ | so | 18:17 |
| dsc_ | sec | 18:17 |
| freemangordon | ok, it is the same for haze/facebook | 18:17 |
| freemangordon | IIUC | 18:17 |
| freemangordon | however, I think this is unrelated to that room alias | 18:18 |
| dsc_ | yes | 18:18 |
| dsc_ | https://github.com/maemo-leste/conversations/blob/master/src/lib/tp.cpp#L759 | 18:18 |
| dsc_ | here's another thing to discuss | 18:18 |
| dsc_ | but we can do that later | 18:18 |
| dsc_ | basically all managers are doing it wrong I guess | 18:19 |
| freemangordon | that was my point - fix the managers | 18:19 |
| freemangordon | do not hardcode special code per protocol | 18:19 |
| freemangordon | in conversations that is | 18:19 |
| dsc_ | maybe | 18:19 |
| dsc_ | depends how much time it costs | 18:19 |
| dsc_ | i dont have unlimited time | 18:19 |
| freemangordon | well... | 18:19 |
| freemangordon | ask for help maybe | 18:19 |
| dsc_ | ? | 18:20 |
| dsc_ | i just worked on this for 3 weeks | 18:20 |
| freemangordon | ask for somebody to help with making it properly | 18:20 |
| freemangordon | if you are short on time that is | 18:20 |
| dsc_ | its properly | 18:20 |
| dsc_ | im sharing this link to discuss it right now | 18:20 |
| dsc_ | i dont know if its good/bad | 18:20 |
| dsc_ | the problem is, we are calling `ensureTextChat` regardless if its a group or direct chat | 18:21 |
| freemangordon | ok | 18:21 |
| dsc_ | the reason this worked in the past, is because I *assume* the managers are ignoring the handle type | 18:21 |
| freemangordon | you don;t have direct chats, anyways, roght? | 18:21 |
| dsc_ | we do, if someone initiated the message first | 18:22 |
| freemangordon | but you receive the handle type still | 18:22 |
| freemangordon | and if remote party initiated the chat and if there is only MUC, then the handle type must be room, no? | 18:22 |
| dsc_ | eh | 18:22 |
| freemangordon | that's what hase does | 18:23 |
| freemangordon | *haze | 18:23 |
| Wizzup | for now I think this works ok, but yes, eventually the tp-qt limiations needs to be fixed | 18:23 |
| freemangordon | otherwise I don;t understand what's going on :) | 18:23 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: what are the limitations that have to be fixed? | 18:23 |
| Wizzup | https://github.com/TelepathyIM/telepathy-qt/issues/5 | 18:24 |
| freemangordon | no need to do that | 18:24 |
| freemangordon | you can simpy run a local QEventLoop until you are done with whatever you have to be | 18:24 |
| Wizzup | I am not sure if blocking progress potentially indefinitely is good either | 18:24 |
| dsc_ | <freemangordon> and if remote party initiated the chat and if there is only MUC, then the handle type must be room, no? <== i dont know? | 18:24 |
| dsc_ | do you know? | 18:24 |
| freemangordon | yes | 18:24 |
| dsc_ | if someone messages you on IRC, and you send a message back, whats the handle type? | 18:24 |
| Wizzup | in any case what we have now works well enough | 18:25 |
| freemangordon | IM? | 18:25 |
| dsc_ | im assuming Contact | 18:25 |
| Wizzup | it would be nice to have the account splugin worknig though | 18:25 |
| freemangordon | dsc_: IM or room? | 18:25 |
| dsc_ | direct message | 18:25 |
| freemangordon | because IRC supports both | 18:25 |
| freemangordon | it is contact | 18:25 |
| freemangordon | not room | 18:25 |
| dsc_ | ok | 18:25 |
| dsc_ | then my question is | 18:25 |
| dsc_ | is calling `ensureTextChat` on a contact OK? | 18:25 |
| freemangordon | but, underlying protocol supports both IM and MU chats | 18:25 |
| freemangordon | if it accepts handle type room, then yes | 18:26 |
| freemangordon | on a contect | 18:26 |
| freemangordon | *contact | 18:26 |
| freemangordon | sure | 18:26 |
| sicelo | (potentially unhelpful , but afaict there's not really IM with matrix ... everything, including one-to-one chat, is treated like a room) | 18:26 |
| Wizzup | a direct message isn't a room though? | 18:26 |
| freemangordon | in what context? | 18:27 |
| Wizzup | sicelo: well yes but it needs to be mapped to TP | 18:27 |
| freemangordon | and TP supports rooms | 18:27 |
| freemangordon | I don't understand the issue here | 18:27 |
| freemangordon | if you do not support IM chats, you dont; announce it | 18:27 |
| freemangordon | IM == 1to1 | 18:28 |
| sicelo | Wizzup: map the matrix 'IM' to a room under TP as well? | 18:28 |
| dsc_ | lets stick to one subject | 18:28 |
| Wizzup | then it will be a group chat | 18:28 |
| Wizzup | do you want to see three people icons next to every matrix chat? | 18:28 |
| freemangordon | isn;t it? a group chat? | 18:29 |
| freemangordon | if it is | 18:29 |
| Wizzup | clearly no client does this | 18:29 |
| freemangordon | if matrix supports group chats only... | 18:29 |
| dsc_ | guys | 18:29 |
| dsc_ | ensureTextChat | 18:29 |
| dsc_ | please | 18:29 |
| Wizzup | ? | 18:29 |
| dsc_ | https://github.com/maemo-leste/conversations/blob/master/src/lib/tp.cpp#L764 | 18:29 |
| freemangordon | dsc_: just a second | 18:29 |
| dsc_ | so we're using this for both rooms and 1:1 | 18:29 |
| dsc_ | just wondering if thats ok | 18:30 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: well, UI wise we can play smart and put 3 people icon anly for chats with more than 2 people :) | 18:30 |
| freemangordon | dsc_: checking | 18:30 |
| dsc_ | freemangordon: ty | 18:30 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: yeah, and how would you know? | 18:30 |
| freemangordon | dsc_: yes, absolutely | 18:30 |
| Wizzup | are you going to paste all the remote_uids? | 18:30 |
| Wizzup | s/paste/parse/ | 18:30 |
| dsc_ | freemangordon: ill remove that matrix specific check | 18:30 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: no, you just need the count of | 18:30 |
| freemangordon | you have atendees, no? | 18:31 |
| Wizzup | if you're online yeah | 18:31 |
| freemangordon | attendees | 18:31 |
| Wizzup | but this is not how rtcom works | 18:31 |
| freemangordon | ah, I see | 18:31 |
| freemangordon | well, if matrix does not support IM chats, why shall we pretend it does? | 18:31 |
| freemangordon | if you can always add another user, is that IM chat? | 18:32 |
| freemangordon | I would not say so | 18:32 |
| freemangordon | dsc_: remote_uid is room id when this is MUC and contact id for IMC | 18:33 |
| dsc_ | i dont think you can add another user, its E2EE 1:! | 18:33 |
| dsc_ | 1:1 | 18:33 |
| dsc_ | not sure how that would work | 18:33 |
| freemangordon | ok, what makes it room then? :) | 18:34 |
| Wizzup | no remote_uid is never the room id | 18:34 |
| freemangordon | sure it is | 18:34 |
| Wizzup | nope | 18:34 |
| freemangordon | well... | 18:34 |
| Wizzup | remote_uid is who the message comes from | 18:34 |
| freemangordon | that's how haze works | 18:34 |
| Wizzup | regardless of whether it is in a channel or not | 18:34 |
| Wizzup | the remote uid of a textchannel, yes | 18:34 |
| freemangordon | in ensureChannel context? no | 18:34 |
| Wizzup | but not of a message | 18:34 |
| dsc_ | freemangordon: from the Tp and conversations side, a 1:1 chat is 1:1, in Matrix its called a 'room' | 18:34 |
| dsc_ | conversations will show the 1 person icon | 18:35 |
| Wizzup | why does it matter? just map it to 1:1 and be done with it as we did now | 18:35 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: we are discussing ensureChannel, not when message comes | 18:35 |
| dsc_ | honestly we are discussing 3 things at once | 18:35 |
| freemangordon | you create a channel to a room | 18:35 |
| freemangordon | heh :) | 18:35 |
| dsc_ | so just to be clear fmg, you want everything to be a room on the Tp/conversations side | 18:36 |
| freemangordon | no | 18:36 |
| freemangordon | I want room to be room and IM to be IM | 18:36 |
| dsc_ | ok, Matrix has IMs :) | 18:36 |
| dsc_ | its 1:1 E2EE | 18:36 |
| freemangordon | you said it has rooms only :) | 18:36 |
| dsc_ | yes, Matrix protocol wise | 18:37 |
| dsc_ | but in conversations it shows as direct / 1:1 | 18:37 |
| dsc_ | like a real contact | 18:37 |
| freemangordon | could you ad another user there? | 18:37 |
| freemangordon | if not, that's IM | 18:37 |
| dsc_ | you cant | 18:37 |
| freemangordon | so this is IM | 18:37 |
| freemangordon | not a room | 18:37 |
| dsc_ | its encrypted chat :P | 18:37 |
| freemangordon | great | 18:37 |
| dsc_ | person to person | 18:37 |
| Wizzup | if that is what you call im then yes | 18:37 |
| Wizzup | they call it a room | 18:37 |
| Wizzup | :D | 18:37 |
| dsc_ | 49048 bit ARC4 | 18:38 |
| freemangordon | and, could you have a group chat? | 18:38 |
| freemangordon | where you can add users? | 18:38 |
| dsc_ | yes | 18:38 |
| dsc_ | i support both types | 18:38 |
| freemangordon | so, thats a room, or MultiUserChat | 18:38 |
| dsc_ | yes | 18:38 |
| freemangordon | I still fail to see the issue :D | 18:38 |
| dsc_ | i know | 18:38 |
| dsc_ | we are discussing nothing | 18:38 |
| dsc_ | so can we get back to ensureTextChat | 18:38 |
| dsc_ | lol | 18:38 |
| freemangordon | yes | 18:39 |
| dsc_ | so, that one can be used for both IM and room | 18:39 |
| dsc_ | question mark | 18:39 |
| dsc_ | this is *the* way to send a text message | 18:39 |
| dsc_ | what is called after doing `ensureTextChat` on the manager side? | 18:39 |
| dsc_ | its createChannelCB right? | 18:40 |
| dsc_ | which provides a textchannel | 18:40 |
| Wizzup | I think there is ensureTextChatroom | 18:40 |
| Wizzup | (not sure if relevant) | 18:40 |
| freemangordon | ensureTextChatroom | 18:40 |
| freemangordon | yes | 18:40 |
| dsc_ | right | 18:40 |
| dsc_ | so https://github.com/maemo-leste/conversations/blob/master/src/lib/tp.cpp#L749 | 18:40 |
| freemangordon | when you want to connect to a room | 18:40 |
| Wizzup | but it's probably just with a different handle type | 18:40 |
| dsc_ | is wrong | 18:40 |
| dsc_ | because it only does `ensureTextChat` | 18:40 |
| dsc_ | ? | 18:40 |
| dsc_ | it needs to take into account the type | 18:40 |
| freemangordon | wait | 18:40 |
| freemangordon | I think the logic is wrong there | 18:41 |
| freemangordon | you should not be allowed to write to a chat if you don;t have channel | 18:41 |
| dsc_ | exactly | 18:41 |
| freemangordon | and you don;t do 'ensureChannel" only when you want to send a message | 18:41 |
| freemangordon | you should do ensureChannel(room) when a chat window is created | 18:42 |
| freemangordon | agree? | 18:42 |
| dsc_ | im thinking | 18:42 |
| Wizzup | lol | 18:43 |
| dsc_ | so you're only in a channel when you are in the chat window | 18:43 |
| Wizzup | I don't agree at all | 18:43 |
| freemangordon | or vice versa | 18:43 |
| dsc_ | i.e: you join a channel on IRC only when you open the chat window | 18:43 |
| dsc_ | seems weird | 18:43 |
| Wizzup | this is just a convenience function to write a message, regardless of whether the Tp::TextChannel exists or not | 18:43 |
| Wizzup | if it doesn't exist ,it makes it for you | 18:43 |
| Wizzup | whether it's correct for multi user rooms I don't know | 18:43 |
| Wizzup | but the logic is sane | 18:43 |
| freemangordon | then you shoudl pass channel type somehow | 18:43 |
| dsc_ | i agree Wizzup but im wondering what fmg thinks | 18:43 |
| freemangordon | no, wait | 18:44 |
| freemangordon | the end result of that now is that messages get lost | 18:44 |
| dsc_ | that also yes | 18:44 |
| dsc_ | :P | 18:44 |
| freemangordon | because you write them, press enter and conversations tries to send them | 18:44 |
| Wizzup | the matrix specific hack? yes | 18:44 |
| freemangordon | no, in general | 18:44 |
| Wizzup | why? | 18:44 |
| freemangordon | but when it cannot send them, for whatever reason, the message gets lost | 18:44 |
| Wizzup | there's a closure there | 18:45 |
| Wizzup | sure we need to handle not being able to send messages in general | 18:45 |
| Wizzup | but the problem is not there | 18:45 |
| freemangordon | that's part of the problem | 18:45 |
| freemangordon | if you cannot connect to a channel, why should ypou be allowed to write a message? | 18:45 |
| Wizzup | ??? | 18:45 |
| freemangordon | try it in fremanlte | 18:45 |
| Wizzup | it will allow me to send a sms to anything or anyone | 18:46 |
| freemangordon | to write a message to contact that's not online | 18:46 |
| Wizzup | regardless of whether it will work or not | 18:46 |
| freemangordon | sms is anotehr story, as sms has no concept of presence | 18:46 |
| Wizzup | again, very basic, just handle the failure of channel creation | 18:46 |
| dsc_ | hmm | 18:46 |
| Wizzup | there's nothing wrong with the logic there: it will create a channel when you try to write something | 18:46 |
| freemangordon | and your message is gone :) | 18:46 |
| Wizzup | nope | 18:46 |
| Wizzup | It's not going to make 100000000 channels for all potential users | 18:47 |
| freemangordon | umm.... do you have that number of chat windows opened? | 18:47 |
| Wizzup | you just want the text box disabled in certain cases | 18:47 |
| Wizzup | that's all fine, but it's so unrelated to what we're discussing i'm a little tired | 18:47 |
| Wizzup | disregard the idea that ever, ever, ever, it is a good idea to map open window to a channel | 18:48 |
| Wizzup | just forget about it now, it's a stupid idea and it doesn't work | 18:48 |
| freemangordon | how it is not related? ensureChannel(room) user has to know the channel type that has to be created | 18:48 |
| Wizzup | we can check for an open window whether it makes sense to allow to send a message | 18:48 |
| Wizzup | that's about it | 18:48 |
| Wizzup | this check is there because if you offline/online you lose all the channels | 18:48 |
| freemangordon | where that message comes from? | 18:48 |
| freemangordon | anyway, lets go back to ensureChannel | 18:49 |
| dsc_ | i got my answer | 18:49 |
| freemangordon | it is manager's job to provide the correct handle type | 18:50 |
| dsc_ | i was just wondering if `ensureTextChat` covered both handle types | 18:50 |
| dsc_ | which it doesnt | 18:50 |
| dsc_ | but | 18:50 |
| freemangordon | right, but that's true regardless of matrix or not | 18:50 |
| dsc_ | we've had this for a long time, at which point I concluded that some managers are just accepting those wrong handle types regardless | 18:50 |
| freemangordon | I don;t see how would that be correct | 18:51 |
| Wizzup | yes they are, and for room we already have open channels anyway since we re-open them immediately upon online | 18:51 |
| dsc_ | or ehm, not the wrong handle type, but e.g `ensureTextChat` for something that is a group | 18:51 |
| Wizzup | so this branch is never hit for channels | 18:51 |
| Wizzup | it already exists, so there's np | 18:51 |
| dsc_ | Wizzup: aaah yes that makes sense | 18:51 |
| freemangordon | ok, but if you want to join a room, then there will be | 18:51 |
| freemangordon | no? | 18:51 |
| Wizzup | then you must use the "join channel" widget | 18:51 |
| freemangordon | yes | 18:51 |
| Wizzup | and until then you won't get a window | 18:51 |
| freemangordon | have to go for a while, ttyl | 18:52 |
| Wizzup | I'm not arguing the code is perfect, I'm arguing that really this doesn't pertain to what we were trying to solve - the validation of the matrix account is rtcom accounts ui ;) | 18:52 |
| dsc_ | discussing about this, like this, is hard with telepathy being telepathy. | 18:53 |
| dsc_ | thats why I would prefer a github issue | 18:53 |
| dsc_ | fmg can just throw in some cheap statements like "just make it properly" but its not so simple some times, and IRC is not a medium where I have time to explain it in full | 18:54 |
| dsc_ | because chat goes at 200kmph :P | 18:55 |
| dsc_ | bbl | 18:55 |
| sicelo | you can use GH issue of course :-) | 18:56 |
| dsc_ | i will, if someone posts an issue | 18:58 |
| freemangordon | dsc_: my statements may look cheap, but my experience tells me that adding protocol-specific workarounds usually just covers more serious issues, which will bite us, inevitably. But, lets see what I can do with rtcom account ui issue as it is way easier to solve | 19:15 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: so, you want that @ before username? | 19:16 |
| freemangordon | I mean, can we just as the user to not write it? | 19:16 |
| freemangordon | *ask | 19:16 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: well it seems to be the proper way to write the matrix address | 19:17 |
| freemangordon | also, I registered matrix account, what packages do I need install to be able to test account ui? | 19:17 |
| Wizzup | I can't say I like it but it is what they decided | 19:17 |
| freemangordon | telepathy-tank? | 19:17 |
| Wizzup | I think you just install the repo I linked | 19:17 |
| Wizzup | it will pull in telepathy-tank | 19:17 |
| freemangordon | ah, ok | 19:18 |
| Wizzup | What is a MXID? | 19:18 |
| Wizzup | Matrix user IDs (MXID) are unique user IDs. They are in the format @username:homeserver.tld (this format is used to avoid confusing them with email addresses.) They are intended to be fairly hidden (although right now they are not) - instead you will find and identify other users via 3PIDs. | 19:18 |
| freemangordon | wait, we have chatbot in the channel?!? | 19:18 |
| Wizzup | ? | 19:18 |
| freemangordon | oh, you just pasted | 19:18 |
| Wizzup | yeah | 19:18 |
| Wizzup | https://matrix.org/docs/older/faq/ | 19:18 |
| freemangordon | yeah | 19:18 |
| Wizzup | so we have two choices the way I see it: | 19:19 |
| freemangordon | I though that you asked a question to a chatbot in the channel :) | 19:19 |
| Wizzup | 1. use regular matrix format and fix rtcom accounts ui | 19:19 |
| Wizzup | 2. make account something else like nickname and make the user just the user name so 'wizzup' and then the server the hostname.tld | 19:19 |
| Wizzup | I think (1) is cleaner but then we need to decide whether we also keep 'user' and 'server' as telepathy-tank properties | 19:20 |
| Wizzup | both account as @user:hostname.tld AND user AND server seem a bit overkill | 19:20 |
| Wizzup | hm I think I actually have a dead polarcell n900 battery | 19:20 |
| Wizzup | strange | 19:20 |
| freemangordon | if we enter @user:hostname.tld then there is no need for user and server fields | 19:20 |
| Wizzup | ah no it is ok (battery) | 19:21 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: yes I think so | 19:21 |
| freemangordon | but, we can also have separate username and server fields | 19:21 |
| Wizzup | yes | 19:21 |
| freemangordon | so, which one do you prefer? | 19:21 |
| Wizzup | I don't know, it depends on how much we care about 'account' parameter | 19:21 |
| freemangordon | we care, it is a must | 19:21 |
| freemangordon | IIRC | 19:21 |
| Wizzup | so tank.manager has always had: | 19:22 |
| Wizzup | [Protocol matrix] | 19:22 |
| Wizzup | param-account=s required | 19:22 |
| Wizzup | param-user=s required | 19:22 |
| Wizzup | param-password=s secret required | 19:22 |
| Wizzup | param-server=s required | 19:22 |
| Wizzup | param-device=s required | 19:22 |
| Wizzup | (except for the 'secret' word, I added that) | 19:22 |
| Wizzup | it's not clear to me why it has this many | 19:22 |
| Wizzup | like: account, user, server | 19:22 |
| Wizzup | gabble doesn't do this for example | 19:22 |
| freemangordon | IIRC rtcom accounts ui splits account and creates user/server fields | 19:22 |
| Wizzup | actually it does also have server, interesting | 19:22 |
| Wizzup | [Protocol jabber] | 19:22 |
| Wizzup | param-account=s required register | 19:22 |
| Wizzup | param-password=s register secret | 19:22 |
| Wizzup | param-server=s | 19:22 |
| Wizzup | (gabble) | 19:22 |
| freemangordon | ok, lemme build it and see | 19:23 |
| Wizzup | so you make an account using mc-tool initially (I didn't test creating accounts yet, just editing) | 19:23 |
| freemangordon | Makefile.am: error: required file './AUTHORS' not found | 19:23 |
| Wizzup | if you try to make it through the UI it will force you throug the 'sign up' button which I don't think works yet) | 19:23 |
| Wizzup | ah yes touch it | 19:23 |
| Wizzup | apologies | 19:23 |
| Wizzup | (touch AUTHORS) | 19:23 |
| freemangordon | yeah | 19:23 |
| Wizzup | back in 5-10 minutes | 19:25 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: what is 'device' field? | 19:28 |
| Wizzup | the protocol supports multiple devices at the same time | 19:30 |
| Wizzup | so just a name for the device, but I suppose it also plays some role in e2ee | 19:30 |
| Wizzup | we can make it Maemo for now and allow editing through advanced | 19:30 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: ok, so I am going to implement + | 19:36 |
| freemangordon | ... | 19:36 |
| freemangordon | @ character property | 19:36 |
| Wizzup | ok, what is the property set on | 19:36 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: do you know, what is the name of '@' in email address? | 19:36 |
| Wizzup | edit/login widget? | 19:37 |
| Wizzup | it is called 'at' | 19:37 |
| freemangordon | yeah, I know it is at | 19:37 |
| freemangordon | but, .... | 19:37 |
| freemangordon | what type of separator it is | 19:37 |
| freemangordon | like, something short for "@ is a separator between username and domain' | 19:38 |
| freemangordon | like 'at_char' or 'account_separator' or... | 19:38 |
| freemangordon | dunno how to name the property | 19:38 |
| freemangordon | PROP_AT_CHAR seems stupid to me | 19:39 |
| Wizzup | separator char | 19:39 |
| Wizzup | user/server separator | 19:39 |
| freemangordon | user-domain-separator? | 19:39 |
| freemangordon | is that ok? | 19:40 |
| Wizzup | sure | 19:40 |
| freemangordon | ok, thanks | 19:40 |
| dsc_ | freemangordon: to answer a earlier thing; waiting on the alias event in createChannelCB | 20:04 |
| dsc_ | please consider: | 20:04 |
| dsc_ | 1) this is after potentially doing join/create, both also http calls, which take time so waiting on the alias event will take in total how long in the blocked loop.. | 20:05 |
| freemangordon | right, but this is not really "blocked", events are being processed | 20:05 |
| freemangordon | also, you can do it by using lambda in the same function | 20:06 |
| freemangordon | in createChannelCB that is | 20:06 |
| dsc_ | 2) a nested event loop, will still work "as a normal Qt eventloop", this means that after join/create, there is a Quotient::Room *room object, which has signals/slots attached that fire *inside the nested eventloop*, which in turn actually *call* createChannelCB | 20:06 |
| freemangordon | so no need of some fancy signal/slots | 20:06 |
| dsc_ | at which point you have some recursion thing | 20:06 |
| dsc_ | or at least some spaghetti to sort out | 20:06 |
| dsc_ | both are not "impossible" problems | 20:07 |
| freemangordon | I understand, but how do you attach to an object you still don't have access to? | 20:07 |
| dsc_ | but they show that I cannot quickly answer you | 20:07 |
| dsc_ | i may have forgotten all the details | 20:07 |
| dsc_ | or I just cannot context switch so fast | 20:07 |
| dsc_ | github issues exist for a reason | 20:07 |
| dsc_ | anyway, issue #2 was particularly annoying | 20:08 |
| dsc_ | < freemangordon> right, but this is not really "blocked", events are being processed <== right | 20:08 |
| freemangordon | how is that different if the initisl call blocks? | 20:09 |
| freemangordon | *initial | 20:09 |
| freemangordon | it is still the same | 20:09 |
| dsc_ | i dont follow sorry | 20:10 |
| dsc_ | issue please | 20:10 |
| freemangordon | so, you have an initial call to libwhatever that establishes a channel with matrix | 20:11 |
| freemangordon | then you have another http call that does some other magic (like getting alias) | 20:11 |
| freemangordon | correct? | 20:11 |
| dsc_ | you're asking about "what happens inside a nested Qt loop when the manager is trying to do bookkeeping between maybe-fully-synchronized Quotient::Room objects and the manager state" | 20:11 |
| freemangordon | no | 20:12 |
| freemangordon | see ^^^ | 20:12 |
| dsc_ | right, the alias comes in automatically | 20:12 |
| dsc_ | but nevertheless its an async 'event' | 20:12 |
| dsc_ | under-the-hood it does some HTTP calls, but thats up to the lib | 20:12 |
| dsc_ | initially you just have the room->id() | 20:13 |
| freemangordon | where that comes from? | 20:13 |
| freemangordon | client side? | 20:13 |
| dsc_ | from the Matrix server API | 20:13 |
| dsc_ | so you call create | 20:13 |
| dsc_ | or join | 20:13 |
| freemangordon | ok, so you have at least one http call :) | 20:13 |
| dsc_ | sure, multiple probably | 20:13 |
| freemangordon | exactly | 20:13 |
| dsc_ | god knows what libquotient does | 20:13 |
| dsc_ | it logs in | 20:13 |
| freemangordon | exactly | 20:13 |
| dsc_ | actually those are so-called 'sync' calls | 20:14 |
| dsc_ | they fetch state, like what rooms you are in | 20:14 |
| freemangordon | and it is even worse than doing local loop, as most-probably the lib just blocks | 20:14 |
| freemangordon | mhm | 20:14 |
| dsc_ | no | 20:14 |
| dsc_ | the lib is Qt | 20:14 |
| freemangordon | how do you know? | 20:14 |
| dsc_ | i looked at the code ^^ | 20:14 |
| freemangordon | regardless | 20:14 |
| dsc_ | it returns a JoinRoomJob *job | 20:14 |
| freemangordon | with id? | 20:15 |
| dsc_ | Quotient::JoinRoomJob* | 20:15 |
| dsc_ | no | 20:15 |
| freemangordon | yes, buit it has id that is retreived from the servers | 20:15 |
| freemangordon | no? | 20:15 |
| dsc_ | the resulting of the job will have an id | 20:15 |
| dsc_ | yeah | 20:15 |
| dsc_ | room->id() | 20:15 |
| dsc_ | it returns Quotient::Room* | 20:15 |
| freemangordon | so, before you get Quotient::Room*, there has been at least one http call | 20:15 |
| freemangordon | correct? | 20:15 |
| dsc_ | what flow are we discussing right now? | 20:16 |
| dsc_ | there is join, or join+create, or just "nothing" | 20:16 |
| freemangordon | auto *job = m_connection->createRoom(visibility, alias, alias.replace("#", ""), topic, invites); | 20:16 |
| freemangordon | so, when createRoom() call returns, do you have id or not? | 20:16 |
| dsc_ | let me check | 20:17 |
| dsc_ | well yes if it returns ofc | 20:17 |
| dsc_ | room_id = joinJob->roomId(); | 20:17 |
| freemangordon | so, it got that id from the servers, so there is at least one http call | 20:17 |
| freemangordon | which blocked | 20:17 |
| dsc_ | yes | 20:17 |
| dsc_ | no | 20:17 |
| dsc_ | well yes, because we actively spawn an eventloop | 20:18 |
| dsc_ | but generally it doesnt block | 20:18 |
| freemangordon | how's that? it was wunning local loop? | 20:18 |
| dsc_ | https://github.com/maemo-leste-upstream-forks/telepathy-tank/blob/maemo/chimaera-devel/src/connection.cpp#L340 | 20:18 |
| dsc_ | because libquotient implements that HTTP call asynchronously as well | 20:18 |
| freemangordon | please -re-read my question | 20:18 |
| freemangordon | "so, when createRoom() call returns, do you have id or not?" | 20:18 |
| freemangordon | in "auto *job = m_connection->createRoom(visibility, alias, alias.replace("#", ""), topic, invites);" call | 20:19 |
| dsc_ | i would assume no | 20:19 |
| freemangordon | ok | 20:19 |
| dsc_ | 90% sure it wont | 20:19 |
| freemangordon | ok | 20:19 |
| dsc_ | it cant know | 20:19 |
| dsc_ | without a HTTP call | 20:19 |
| freemangordon | so it has issued the calls but not waiting for reply | 20:19 |
| freemangordon | so, if we want the result, we must wait | 20:19 |
| freemangordon | anyway, lemme finish what I am doing | 20:20 |
| dsc_ | what do you mean | 20:20 |
| freemangordon | (rtcom accounts ui) | 20:20 |
| dsc_ | "we must wait" | 20:20 |
| dsc_ | we are waiting, no? | 20:20 |
| freemangordon | QEventLoop().exec() | 20:20 |
| freemangordon | yes | 20:20 |
| freemangordon | we are | 20:20 |
| dsc_ | ok, just checking | 20:20 |
| dsc_ | <freemangordon> dsc_: my statements may look cheap <== to be clear, you asked me "why didnt you look for help" which I find cheap yes, I wrote a long markdown document before starting this Matrix work | 20:24 |
| dsc_ | and then you say "why dont you just do it properly" | 20:24 |
| Wizzup | guys, the current thing works well :) | 20:24 |
| dsc_ | can we *please* focus on the technical stuff | 20:24 |
| dsc_ | yes | 20:24 |
| dsc_ | i cant deal with that, sorry | 20:24 |
| dsc_ | ill go play some videogames :P | 20:24 |
| dsc_ | bbl | 20:25 |
| Wizzup | lel: test | 20:31 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: " create_account_cb: account could not be created: missing required parameter 'user'" | 20:41 |
| freemangordon | now, we set 'account' property, that is in the shape of "@userrname:server.com" | 20:41 |
| freemangordon | what else does it want? | 20:41 |
| freemangordon | IIUC it should require either account or username/server, but not both | 20:44 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: tank.manager says user as required too | 20:49 |
| Wizzup | and it uses user | 20:49 |
| Wizzup | this is what I mentioned above | 20:49 |
| Wizzup | required are: account,user,password,server,device | 20:49 |
| Wizzup | but like I said, we need to choose what makes the most sense here I guess | 20:49 |
| Wizzup | I don't know why there is user and account | 20:50 |
| freemangordon | mhm | 20:50 |
| freemangordon | ok, will fix that | 20:50 |
| Wizzup | this is a decision the tp-tank people made before we ever knew it existed | 20:50 |
| freemangordon | ok, ok | 20:50 |
| Wizzup | I think technically we probably want user to just be @user or just user and the server to be the server | 20:50 |
| Wizzup | so maybe we can take account and set user and server up that way, and then we just patch tp-tank to handle that nicely | 20:50 |
| freemangordon | I'll implement that in accounts-ui plugin | 20:50 |
| Wizzup | that being? what exactly? | 20:51 |
| Wizzup | (also thx) | 20:51 |
| freemangordon | will split account to username/server | 20:52 |
| freemangordon | and will provide all that's needed | 20:52 |
| Wizzup | btw, /etc/init.d/leste-config-n900 - I will remove the nr_request | 20:53 |
| Wizzup | does it make sense to keep the script, maybe to set boost mode and min freq 500? or a combination of those? | 20:53 |
| Wizzup | I prefer setting it from the script to changing it in dts, until we figure out how to make the freq changing better/faster with governors | 20:53 |
| freemangordon | TBH I don;t think we shall set min freq to 500, but OTOH I don't use n900 with leste so... | 20:54 |
| Wizzup | it does seem to make a big difference in resposiveness | 20:55 |
| Wizzup | responsiveness | 20:55 |
| Wizzup | and pw wise there is no difference | 20:55 |
| Wizzup | (since we don't do RET or OFF) | 20:55 |
| freemangordon | yeah, but we don;t know how it affect device lifespan | 20:55 |
| Wizzup | if the device is still alive now, 16 years later... :D | 20:56 |
| freemangordon | yeah | 20:56 |
| freemangordon | no strong preference, as you decice | 20:56 |
| freemangordon | *decide | 20:57 |
| arno11 | Wizzup: using the script for 500MHz sounds good imo | 20:59 |
| Wizzup | building new leste-config but without 500mhz for now, but have the statements there commented | 21:18 |
| arno11 | ok cool | 21:26 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: yeah, signing in does not work | 21:54 |
| freemangordon | but I have | 21:54 |
| freemangordon | plugin working | 21:54 |
| freemangordon | are you sure 'device' belongs to advanced settings? | 21:55 |
| freemangordon | as it is required | 21:55 |
| Wizzup | we can default to Maemo | 21:55 |
| Wizzup | but you can take it out of advanced just the same | 21:55 |
| Wizzup | then we don't need advanced code | 21:55 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: can we not get rid of the 'sign in' stuff? | 21:55 |
| freemangordon | why would we? | 21:55 |
| freemangordon | how do you know account is correctly setup? | 21:56 |
| freemangordon | anyway, will finish it tomorrow | 21:57 |
| freemangordon | ttyl | 21:57 |
| arno11 | guys, with renice stuff, 250MHz freq is 'usable' with no lags | 21:59 |
| freemangordon | mhm | 21:59 |
| freemangordon | with proper cgroups it will be even better | 22:00 |
| arno11 | yes :) | 22:00 |
| Wizzup | why do we not use -n for these on dsmetool ? | 22:01 |
| freemangordon | no reason | 22:02 |
| freemangordon | but we have to check what -n means | 22:02 |
| freemangordon | still ,someday we will want proper cgroups | 22:05 |
| freemangordon | someday... :) | 22:05 |
| Wizzup | -n --nice=N Set used nice value (priority) | 22:05 |
| Wizzup | for started process | 22:05 |
| Wizzup | seems pretty clear to me | 22:05 |
| freemangordon | ok, but in fremantle xorg is started with -n 8 | 22:06 |
| freemangordon | so I think we shall check what dsme does | 22:06 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: did you push the plugin code | 22:07 |
| Wizzup | -n 8 seems like it should be -n -8 | 22:07 |
| freemangordon | exactly | 22:07 |
| freemangordon | or rather - maybe dsme put that minus | 22:08 |
| freemangordon | thus - we shall check ;) | 22:08 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: will push plugin code tomorrow, when it is ready | 22:08 |
| freemangordon | as rtcom-accounts-ui needs more changes | 22:09 |
| Wizzup | ok | 22:17 |
| arno11 | freemangordon: thanks a million btw for shader stuff and renice tweaks | 22:36 |
| Wizzup | freemangordon: | 22:41 |
| Wizzup | /etc/init.d/xorg: XDG_SESSION_TYPE=x11 /usr/sbin/dsmetool -n -8 -r "autologin user startx -- $XORG_OPTIONS" | 22:41 |
| Wizzup | it is -8 | 22:41 |
| Wizzup | not 8 | 22:41 |
| freemangordon | Wizzup: this is not fremantle | 23:01 |
| freemangordon | ok, that's correct | 23:03 |
| freemangordon | exec /usr/sbin/dsmetool -n -8 -r "/usr/bin/Xorg $XORG_OPTIONS" | 23:03 |
| freemangordon | this is from fremantle | 23:03 |
| Wizzup | sure it's the same | 23:07 |
| freemangordon | systemui has nice of 20 | 23:08 |
| freemangordon | weird | 23:08 |
| freemangordon | mce 15 | 23:08 |
| freemangordon | h-d hase 20 | 23:09 |
| freemangordon | *has | 23:09 |
| freemangordon | but it is in a special cgroup | 23:13 |
| Wizzup | 20 or -20? | 23:25 |
| Wizzup | they were 0 on my device | 23:26 |
| freemangordon | 20 | 23:27 |
| freemangordon | on fremantle that is | 23:27 |
| Wizzup | probably the special cgroup makes the diff | 23:31 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!
