Adam Jackson <a...@redhat.com> writes: > You can only register one drawable on a given damage, so there's no > reason to require the caller to specify the drawable, the damage is > enough. The implementation would do something fairly horrible if you > _did_ pass mismatched drawable and damage, so let's avoid the problem > entirely. > > Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson <a...@redhat.com>
> diff --git a/hw/xfree86/modes/xf86Rotate.c b/hw/xfree86/modes/xf86Rotate.c
> index a393747..0b86f01 100644
> --- a/hw/xfree86/modes/xf86Rotate.c
> +++ b/hw/xfree86/modes/xf86Rotate.c
> @@ -272,9 +272,7 @@ xf86RotateDestroy(xf86CrtcPtr crtc)
> screenDrawable = &pScreen->root->drawable;
> /* Free damage structure */
> if (xf86_config->rotation_damage_registered) {
> - if (screenDrawable)
> - DamageUnregister(screenDrawable,
> - xf86_config->rotation_damage);
> + DamageUnregister(xf86_config->rotation_damage);
> xf86_config->rotation_damage_registered = FALSE;
> DisableLimitedSchedulingLatency();
> }
This one looked weird. I think thanks to patch 1, you want to just drop
this unregister, and drop the conditional on the DamageDestroy that
follows.
pgpEGuNZl6xG_.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ 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
