On 08/08/2016 08:37 AM, Mathias Fröhlich wrote:
Brian,
On Monday, 8 August 2016 08:27:40 CEST Brian Paul wrote:
> On 08/06/2016 12:42 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> > From: Mathias Fröhlich <[email protected]>
> >
> > We need this for 'inline'.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mathias Fröhlich <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > src/gallium/auxiliary/util/u_bitcast.h | 2 ++
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/src/gallium/auxiliary/util/u_bitcast.h
b/src/gallium/auxiliary/util/u_bitcast.h
> > index b1f9938..e8fb0fe 100644
> > --- a/src/gallium/auxiliary/util/u_bitcast.h
> > +++ b/src/gallium/auxiliary/util/u_bitcast.h
> > @@ -30,6 +30,8 @@
> >
> > #include <string.h>
> >
> > +#include "c99_compat.h"
> > +
> > #ifdef __cplusplus
> > extern "C" {
> > #endif
> >
>
> Shouldn't this get squashed into patch 1?
No, i don't think so.
Patch 1 is about src/util/bitscan.h.
You're right. I was hasty. I had applied your patch series, tried to
compile it and then hit the issue. It turns out that I actually have
this issue even without any of your patches applied (I didn't check that
before).
I don't know why my local build is failing while appveyor and our
in-house automated build seem OK. But applying your patch 3 alone fixes
things for me.
The series did so far *not* touch
src/gallium/auxiliary/util/u_bitcast.h at all.
I just put that there since you seem to have stepped onto
that. And it appeared to me that I kindly asked for testing
that seems to be hold back by that unrelated compile failure.
And if in the end your compile is fixed with my pending push
both will be happy then. Right?
Yeah, I applied your whole series and the MSVC build seems OK. However,
I'm hitting a new runtime crash (even after fixing the unrelated issue
from Marek's rewrite of the state tracker validation code). It looks
like patch 2/3 is the problem. I'll try to dig deeper tomorrow...
-Brian
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
