On 6 March 2018 at 09:57, Bas Nieuwenhuizen <ba...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 8:02 AM, Iago Toral <ito...@igalia.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, 2018-03-05 at 12:11 +0000, Emil Velikov wrote: >> > Hi Iago, >> > >> > Top level questions: >> > >> > I think this and the original commit should go to stable right? >> >> I am not sure if this qualifies for stable: these patches don't fix any >> user-visible bugs. If an application was calling vkGetDeviceProcAddr to >> get pointers to non-device functions (which is incorrect by the spec) >> the previous behavior would allow it to get away with it without >> issues, bit with these patches it will start to crash since it will >> receive NULL pointers. >> According to Lenny's comment in the github issue there's nothing to be concerned. Namely: - "The pointers being returned are invalid. ... trying to use them will result in a crash." - "Wolfenstein was acquiring, but not using the pointers."
>> > The dispatch in 17.3 is very different making, yet 18.0 should be >> > perfectly fine. >> > >> > Mildly related - anv is missing a special case for following three >> > extensions. Should we port those over from radv? >> > >> > vkCreateInstance vkEnumerateInstanceExtensionProperties >> > vkEnumerateInstanceLayerProperties >> >> What is the exception exactly? Right now we report NULL for these from >> vkGetDeviceProcAddr which is the right thing to do. > > > He's talking about the 3 instance commands that we should return in the > GetInstanceProcAddr even if instance is NULL, but anv handles that inside > anv_device.c anyway, so I don't think there is anything to be done there. Indeed. Thanks Bas. HTH Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
