On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 10:39 AM, Matt Turner <matts...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> The i965 backends pass something out of 'screen', which is allocated >> per-process, making using this as a ralloc context not thread-safe. >> >> All callers ra_alloc_interference_graph() already ralloc_free() its >> return value. >> --- >> src/util/register_allocate.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/src/util/register_allocate.c b/src/util/register_allocate.c >> index 6cf7ce7..1cfd66f 100644 >> --- a/src/util/register_allocate.c >> +++ b/src/util/register_allocate.c >> @@ -374,7 +374,7 @@ ra_alloc_interference_graph(struct ra_regs *regs, >> unsigned int count) >> struct ra_graph *g; >> unsigned int i; >> >> - g = rzalloc(regs, struct ra_graph); >> + g = rzalloc(NULL, struct ra_graph); > > > Why not make ra_alloc_interference_graph take a ralloc context?
I mean, I could, but why? All callers of ra_alloc_interference_graph() ralloc_free its result themselves. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
