@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
This already begins obscuring things, because now there are two sets of
shared-module functions for manipulating the same structure, e.g.,
common_hal_canio_remote_transmission_request_get_id and
common_hal_canio_message_get_id
Tested & working:
* Send standard packets
* Receive standard packets (1 FIFO, no filter)
Interoperation between SAM E54 Xplained running this tree and
MicroPython running on STM32F405 Feather with an external
transceiver was also tested.
Many other aspects of a full implementation are not yet present,
such as error detection and recovery.
