On 07/17/15 11:21 AM, Ismael Luceno wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 15:57:17 -0300
Ismael Luceno <ism...@iodev.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 07:24:59 -0700
Alan Coopersmith <alan.coopersm...@oracle.com> wrote:
On 07/14/15 09:36 PM, Ismael Luceno wrote:
@@ -410,7 +410,7 @@ set_fontset_extents(
font_data = (FontData) font_set->vrotate;
font_data_count = font_set->vrotate_num;
for( ; font_data_count-- ; font_data++) {
- if(font_data->font != NULL) {
+ if(font_data && font_data->font) {
check_fontset_extents(&overall,
&logical_ascent, &logical_descent,
font_data->font);
This one is more definitively handled in the wrapping check:
if(font_set->vrotate_num > 0 && font_set->vrotate !=
NULL) {
I can't see any way font_data could ever be NULL here.
I've been thinking it may be a bug in GCC (5.1), I see it optimizes
out a lot around there, but had no time to confirm it yet...
I can upload the output if you want to look at the machine code.
I will try building with different flags to point out the problem
(might take some time, there's a lot to test and I'm quite busy with
other stuff).
It seems to be an issue with GCC's speculative load scheduling, but
I'm not entirely sure that what GCC is doing is wrong...
Are you building with strict-aliasing on or off? Since the check is
done before casting, I wonder if gcc is deciding they can't alias due
to the type differences.
--
-Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@oracle.com
Oracle Solaris Engineering - http://blogs.oracle.com/alanc
_______________________________________________
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
