On 06/19/2014 05:24 AM, Juha-Pekka Heikkila wrote:
> Check calloc return value and report on error, also later skip
> results handling if there was no memory to store results to.
>
> Signed-off-by: Juha-Pekka Heikkila <juhapekka.heikk...@gmail.com>
> ---
> src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_performance_monitor.c | 7 ++++++-
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_performance_monitor.c
> b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_performance_monitor.c
> index 3f64eae..aeef5b9 100644
> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_performance_monitor.c
> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_performance_monitor.c
> @@ -610,6 +610,10 @@ gather_statistics_results(struct brw_context *brw,
> ctx->PerfMonitor.Groups[PIPELINE_STATS_COUNTERS].NumCounters;
>
> monitor->pipeline_stats_results = calloc(num_counters, sizeof(uint64_t));
> + if (monitor->pipeline_stats_results == NULL) {
> + _mesa_error_no_memory(__func__);
> + return;
> + }
>
> drm_intel_bo_map(monitor->pipeline_stats_bo, false);
> uint64_t *start = monitor->pipeline_stats_bo->virtual;
> @@ -1321,7 +1325,8 @@ brw_get_perf_monitor_result(struct gl_context *ctx,
> if (!monitor->pipeline_stats_results)
> gather_statistics_results(brw, monitor);
>
I think I'd rather have
if (!monitor->pipeline_stats_results)
return;
here than the check in the loop.
With that change, this patch is
Reviewed-by: Ian Romanick <ian.d.roman...@intel.com>
> - for (int i = 0; i < num_counters; i++) {
> + for (int i = 0; i < num_counters
> + && monitor->pipeline_stats_results != NULL; i++) {
> if (BITSET_TEST(m->ActiveCounters[PIPELINE_STATS_COUNTERS], i)) {
> data[offset++] = PIPELINE_STATS_COUNTERS;
> data[offset++] = i;
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
