Hybrid allocation is now part of the infrastructure. Moving memory contents would not be necessary because displayio can recreate them, but does not hurt.
Hybrid allocation is now part of the infrastructure. Moving memory contents would not be necessary because displayio can recreate them, but does not hurt.
This allows calls to `allocate_memory()` while the VM is running, it will then allocate from the GC heap (unless there is a suitable hole among the supervisor allocations), and when the VM exits and the GC heap is freed, the allocation will be moved to the bottom of the former GC heap and transformed into a proper supervisor allocation. Existing movable allocations will also be moved to defragment the supervisor heap and ensure that the next VM run gets as much memory as possible for the GC heap.
By itself this breaks terminalio because it violates the assumption that supervisor_display_move_memory() still has access to an undisturbed heap to copy the tilegrid from. It will work in many cases, but if you're unlucky you will get garbled terminal contents after exiting from the vm run that created the display. This will be fixed in the following commit, which is separate to simplify review.
* Initialize the EPaper display on the MagTag at start.
* Tweak the display send to take a const buffer.
* Correct Luma math
* Multiply the blue component, not add.
* Add all of the components together before dividing. This
reduces the impact of truncated division.
After calling board.SPI().deinit(), calling board.SPI() again would return the unusable deinited object and there was no way of getting it back into an initialized state until the end of the session.
Fixes#3581.
Pins were marked as never_reset by common_hal_displayio_fourwire_construct() and common_hal_sharpdisplay_framebuffer_construct(), but these marks were never removed, so at the end of a session after displayio.release_displays(), {spi|i2c}_singleton would be set to NULL but the pins would not be reset. In the next session, board.SPI() and board.I2C() were unable to reconstruct the object because the pins were still in use.
For symmetry with creation of the singleton, add deinitialization before setting it to NULL in reset_board_busses(). This makes the pins resettable, so that reset_port(), moved behind it, then resets them.
At the end of a session that called displayio.release_displays() (and did not initialize a new display), a board.I2C() bus that was previously used by a display would wrongly be considered still in use. While I can’t think of any unrecoverable problem this would cause in the next session, it violates the assumption that a soft reboot resets everything not needed by displays, potentially leading to confusion.
By itself, this change does not fix the problem yet - rather, it introduces the same issue as in #3581 for SPI. This needs to be solved in the same way for I2C and SPI.
This is enabled by #3482
I was unable to determine why previously I had added sizeof(void*)
to the GC heap allocation, so I removed that code as a mistake.
@cwalther determined that for boards with 2 displays (monster m4sk),
start_terminal would be called for each one, leaking supervisor heap
entries.
Determine, by comparing addresses, whether the display being acted on
is the first display (number zero) and do (or do not) call start_terminal.
stop_terminal can safely be called multiple times, so there's no need
to guard against calling it more than once.
Slight behavioral change: The terminal size would follow the displays[0]
size, not the displays[1] size
If the display is paused, `_PM_swapbuffer_maybe` will never return.
So, when brightness is 0, refresh does nothing. This makes it necessary
to update the display when unpausing.
Closes: #3524
A call to supervisor_start_terminal remained in
common_hal_displayio_display_construct and was copied to other display
_construct functions, even though it was also being done in
displayio_display_core_construct when that was factored out.
Originally, this was harmless, except it created an extra allocation.
When investigating #3482, I found that this bug became harmful,
especially for displays that were created in Python code, because it
caused a supervisor allocation to leak.
I believe that it is safe to merge #3482 after this PR is merged.
An RGBMatrix has no bus and no bus_free method. It is always possible
to refresh the display.
This was not a problem before, but the fix I suggested (#3449) added
a call to core_bus_free when a FramebufferDisplay was being refreshed.
This was not caught during testing.
This is a band-aid fix and it brings to light a second problem in which
a SharpDisplay + FrameBuffer will not have a 'bus' object, and yet does
operate using a shared SPI bus. This kind of display will need a
"bus-free" like function to be added, or it can have problems like
#3309.
It was incorrect to NULL out the pointer to our heap allocated buffer in
`reset`, because subsequent to framebuffer_reset, but while
the heap was still active, we could call `get_bufinfo` again,
leading to a fresh allocation on the heap that is about to be destroyed.
Typical stack trace:
```
#1 0x0006c368 in sharpdisplay_framebuffer_get_bufinfo
#2 0x0006ad6e in _refresh_display
#3 0x0006b168 in framebufferio_framebufferdisplay_background
#4 0x00069d22 in displayio_background
#5 0x00045496 in supervisor_background_tasks
#6 0x000446e8 in background_callback_run_all
#7 0x00045546 in supervisor_run_background_tasks_if_tick
#8 0x0005b042 in common_hal_neopixel_write
#9 0x00044c4c in clear_temp_status
#10 0x000497de in spi_flash_flush_keep_cache
#11 0x00049a66 in supervisor_external_flash_flush
#12 0x00044b22 in supervisor_flash_flush
#13 0x0004490e in filesystem_flush
#14 0x00043e18 in cleanup_after_vm
#15 0x0004414c in run_repl
#16 0x000441ce in main
```
When this happened -- which was inconsistent -- the display would keep
some heap allocation across reset which is exactly what we need to avoid.
NULLing the pointer in reconstruct follows what RGBMatrix does, and that
code is a bit more battle-tested anyway.
If I had a motivation for structuring the SharpMemory code differently,
I can no longer recall it.
Testing performed: Ran my complicated calculator program over multiple
iterations without observing signs of heap corruption.
Closes: #3473
