On 01.02.2012 15:23, Brian Paul wrote: > On 02/01/2012 03:40 AM, Jose Fonseca wrote: >> Silences warnings and fixes potential bugs due to buffer overflow. >> >> The nv50 maintainers could benefit from sprinkling a few asserts to >> catch this early in the future, as it is bound to happen again. > > Good point. I'll add a couple asserts.
Hm, I don't see any assertions in the commit ... I should really have used something like NV50_MAX_INSN_SRCS in the loop in the old code there (nv50_pc_regalloc), but it's scheduled for removal anyway ... As for the optimization pass, I don't see how the compiler can statically determine that the array will overflow, and it wasn't supposed to (maximum store size is 16 bytes, and minimum size of a Value (with TGSI input) is 4 bytes, makes 4 Values. But you're right I should have been more careful with that code, it's ... been written at a point where I just wanted to be done with it (but still include enough optimizations so as to not produce worse code than the old solution). Thanks for fixing, Christoph hm, I need to make my compiler spit out better/more warnings ... > > -Brian > _______________________________________________ > mesa-dev mailing list > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
