On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 1:20 AM, Steinar H. Gunderson
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 04:00:09PM +0100, Marek Olšák wrote:
>> "sync" is undeclared here. It builds, because "sync" is also a
>> function from unistd.h. This is wrong.
>
> Attaching new version, fixing this
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 04:00:09PM +0100, Marek Olšák wrote:
> Sorry, I'm withdrawing my statement.
>
> Look at this code:
>
> _mesa_ObjectPtrLabel(const void *ptr, GLsizei length, const GLchar *label)
> {
> GET_CURRENT_CONTEXT(ctx);
> - struct gl_sync_object *const syncObj = (struct
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 04:00:09PM +0100, Marek Olšák wrote:
> "sync" is undeclared here. It builds, because "sync" is also a
> function from unistd.h. This is wrong.
Attaching new version, fixing this wrong use of “sync” (both places in the
file).
As for code after declaration, I looked for it
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:33 PM, Steinar H. Gunderson
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 07:00:20PM +0100, Marek Olšák wrote:
> Might be worth keeping _mesa_ref_sync_object(), even if it's an inline
> wrapper around the above. As things get a bit confusing - foo_get
On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Marek Olšák wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:33 PM, Steinar H. Gunderson
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 07:00:20PM +0100, Marek Olšák wrote:
>> Might be worth keeping _mesa_ref_sync_object(), even if it's an
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 1:31 AM, Steinar H. Gunderson
wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 11:42:59AM +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
>>> Might be worth keeping _mesa_ref_sync_object(), even if it's an inline
>>> wrapper around the above. As things get a bit confusing -
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 07:00:20PM +0100, Marek Olšák wrote:
Might be worth keeping _mesa_ref_sync_object(), even if it's an inline
wrapper around the above. As things get a bit confusing - foo_get vs
foo_unref.
>>> What about _mesa_get_and_ref_sync()?
> Sounds good to me.
Attached
On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 11:42:59AM +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
>> Might be worth keeping _mesa_ref_sync_object(), even if it's an inline
>> wrapper around the above. As things get a bit confusing - foo_get vs
>> foo_unref.
> What about _mesa_get_and_ref_sync()?
Ping on this.
>> Can you
Hello Steinar,
On 8 December 2015 at 01:01, Steinar H. Gunderson
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was told that it's easier for people to review my patch if it comes in via
> email than being stuck in the bug tracker; FWIW, this is for bug 120238.
Which bugtracker it this ? bugs.fd.o
On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 10:35:25AM +, Emil Velikov wrote:
>> I was told that it's easier for people to review my patch if it comes in via
>> email than being stuck in the bug tracker; FWIW, this is for bug 120238.
> Which bugtracker it this ? bugs.fd.o does not like the number
> mentioned.
Hi,
I was told that it's easier for people to review my patch if it comes in via
email than being stuck in the bug tracker; FWIW, this is for bug 120238.
(It's the same patch as is already in the tracker.)
/* Steinar */
===
From 6e3d1880fa78a3a965cb7eb51ee12b1f785f84bb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
11 matches
Mail list logo