On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 09:23:27 +0200
Michel Dänzer <mic...@daenzer.net> wrote:
> On Fre, 2011-04-29 at 08:52 +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > On Don, 2011-04-28 at 13:27 -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > > @@ -1114,7 +1169,7 @@ DRI2ScreenInit(ScreenPtr pScreen, DRI2InfoPtr info)
> > > ds->ScheduleSwap = info->ScheduleSwap;
> > > ds->ScheduleWaitMSC = info->ScheduleWaitMSC;
> > > ds->GetMSC = info->GetMSC;
> > > - cur_minor = 3;
> > > + cur_minor = 4;
> > > } else {
> > > cur_minor = 1;
> > > }
> >
> > This bugfix should probably be separate.
>
> Never mind, I thought cur_minor was used for something else than what it
> is.
>
>
> On a not directly related note, the following code:
>
> /* Initialize minor if needed and set to minimum provied by DDX */
> if (!dri2_minor || dri2_minor > cur_minor)
> dri2_minor = cur_minor;
>
> seems to rely on dri2_minor being initialized to 0, but it's not static,
> and I don't see any initialization for it elsewhere. So dri2_minor could
> end up being lower than intended if it's not 0 initially. Am I missing
> something?
Both globals and statics w/o specific assignments at init will be set
to 0. At least, that's the behavior we're relying on here! Adding an
explicit = 0 at the top of dri2.c wouldn't hurt, aside from generating
a little extra code.
--
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
_______________________________________________
xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
