On 7 February 2012 13:03, Christoph Bumiller
wrote:
> On 07.02.2012 13:47, Jose Fonseca wrote:
>> Makes sense.
>
> Very much so ...
> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/commit/?id=189e6c7e81ce35b89d9b52d4bd0d6271a7e9c10f
> (of 26 hours ago).
Ha, snap. Thanks anyway. :)
(Doesn't matter too mu
On 07.02.2012 13:47, Jose Fonseca wrote:
> Makes sense.
Very much so ...
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/commit/?id=189e6c7e81ce35b89d9b52d4bd0d6271a7e9c10f
(of 26 hours ago).
>
> Jose
>
> - Original Message -
>> The assertion added in f09910f3 broke nv50 completely by asserting
>>
Makes sense.
Jose
- Original Message -
> The assertion added in f09910f3 broke nv50 completely by asserting
> that
> the number of elements in a dereferenced pointer (i.e. 1) was greater
> than i (which ranged up to six), rather than checking the number of
> elements in the containing arr
The assertion added in f09910f3 broke nv50 completely by asserting that
the number of elements in a dereferenced pointer (i.e. 1) was greater
than i (which ranged up to six), rather than checking the number of
elements in the containing array.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Stone
---
src/gallium/drivers/
