On 04/10/16 01:53 AM, Roland Scheidegger wrote: > In an ideal world everybody would zero-intialize the template I suppose > - then it would easily survive such interface changes.
As long as there are no fields where 0 isn't a safe value... What's needed is an explicit definition of whether it's the caller's or callee's responsibility to initialize the next field (in particular, and any other fields in general). Are there any cases where the resource_create caller needs to pass in a non-NULL next field value? Note that with the original problem I fixed in radeon, the caller wasn't in state tracker code but in driver internal code. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.amd.com Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and X developer _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
