On Thursday, 2018-02-15 11:25:33 +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > Hi Eric, > > On 15 February 2018 at 11:17, Eric Engestrom <eric.engest...@imgtec.com> > wrote: > > Daniel, `w` seemed like the "least bad" thing to return in this case; > > would you prefer `0`? > > I guess Coverity doesn't know it can never be invalid. We look up a > visual in the table using dri2_surf->format, whcih is only ever set > from the table itself when creating a surface. assert(visual_idx == > -1) should be enough to please Coverity there I think.
(I assume you meant `!=`) Sounds like assume() might be better than assert() though, if it's actually impossible (barring internal bug), so that the compiler can drop the `== -1` paths. Sending a v2 in a minute :) > > Cheers, > Daniel _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
