On 28/09/16 12:33 AM, Rob Clark wrote: > Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdcl...@gmail.com> > --- > I had a scan through the rest of pipe_resource allocations, and I think > this is the only remaining one (besides r600_alloc_buffer_struct()) > which was using MALLOC_STRUCT().. sorry 'bout that
Note that the MALLOC_STRUCT here isn't relevant: > diff --git a/src/gallium/drivers/r300/r300_screen_buffer.c > b/src/gallium/drivers/r300/r300_screen_buffer.c > index 4747058..24dd92f 100644 > --- a/src/gallium/drivers/r300/r300_screen_buffer.c > +++ b/src/gallium/drivers/r300/r300_screen_buffer.c > @@ -163,6 +163,7 @@ struct pipe_resource *r300_buffer_create(struct > pipe_screen *screen, > rbuf = MALLOC_STRUCT(r300_resource); > > rbuf->b.b = *templ; The pipe_resource::next field is copied in from the template here, so the question is really whether the next field of the template is initialized to NULL by all callers. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.amd.com Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and X developer _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
