https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99781
--- Comment #20 from Uli Schlachter <[email protected]> ---
Random guess for where the regression comes from:
X11DRV_expect_error() is used to say "I expect that the next request might
fail":
https://github.com/wine-mirror/wine/blob/6d801377055911d914226a3c6af8d8637a63fa13/dlls/winex11.drv/x11drv_main.c#L228-L241
...which is then used by the error handler to check if the error is expected
and should be ignored:
https://github.com/wine-mirror/wine/blob/6d801377055911d914226a3c6af8d8637a63fa13/dlls/winex11.drv/x11drv_main.c#L262-L271
So... apparently Wine wants to catch errors for "the next X11 request" while
mesa tries to invent errors that do not come from any X11 request.
Another random idea for a fix would be: Add a call to XSync(dpy, False) to the
"invent an error"-functions. That should guarantee that dpy->request ==
dpy->last_request_read and so it does not matter any more which of the two
sequence numbers mesa uses.
(Well, actually XSync() does a XGetInputFocus() internally, so mesa would then
use the sequence number of this GetInputFocus request for its claim that
something failed that never happened.)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
