Although this new patch was already reviewed and pushed, just a nitpick:
as this is the second version of your original patch, usually a comment
on the commit summary is added explaining the changes on the new version
of the patch, and a v2 suffix is added when the patch is sent ([PATCH v2]).
On 1
On 04/12/2016 12:53 PM, John Sheu wrote:
The XMesaVisual instances freed in the visuals table on display close
are being freed with a free() call, instead of XMesaDestroyVisual(),
causing a memory leak.
Signed-off-by: John Sheu
---
src/mesa/drivers/x11/fakeglx.c | 2 +-
src/mesa/drivers/x11/
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 11:53 AM, John Sheu wrote:
> The XMesaVisual instances freed in the visuals table on display close
> are being freed with a free() call, instead of XMesaDestroyVisual(),
> causing a memory leak.
>
> Signed-off-by: John Sheu
> ---
> src/mesa/drivers/x11/fakeglx.c | 2 +-
>
The XMesaVisual instances freed in the visuals table on display close
are being freed with a free() call, instead of XMesaDestroyVisual(),
causing a memory leak.
Signed-off-by: John Sheu
---
src/mesa/drivers/x11/fakeglx.c | 2 +-
src/mesa/drivers/x11/xm_api.c | 1 +
2 files changed, 2 insertion
On 02/04/16 00:04, John Sheu wrote:
> The XMesaVisual instances freed in the visuals table on display close
> are being freed with a free() call, instead of XMesaDestroyVisual(),
> causing a memory leak.
> ---
> src/mesa/drivers/x11/fakeglx.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(
The XMesaVisual instances freed in the visuals table on display close
are being freed with a free() call, instead of XMesaDestroyVisual(),
causing a memory leak.
---
src/mesa/drivers/x11/fakeglx.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/x11/fakeglx.c b/
