On Tue, 2017-09-12 at 16:08 +0100, Eric Engestrom wrote:
> On Wednesday, 2017-09-06 17:25:29 +0100, Emil Velikov wrote:
> > I'm not that much of an expert on things XCB, so perhaps a silly question.
> > Isn't the presence checked with the code just above the removed hunk?
> > Namely:
> >
> > exte
On Wednesday, 2017-09-06 17:25:29 +0100, Emil Velikov wrote:
> On 6 September 2017 at 17:17, Adam Jackson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2017-09-01 at 15:04 +0100, Eric Engestrom wrote:
> >> These fields were added in 2d94601582 but never used; hasPresent was
> >> never set, while the other ones were set but
On 6 September 2017 at 17:17, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-09-01 at 15:04 +0100, Eric Engestrom wrote:
>> These fields were added in 2d94601582 but never used; hasPresent was
>> never set, while the other ones were set but never read.
>
> I think this patch is wrong:
>
>> - dri3_reply = xc
On Fri, 2017-09-01 at 15:04 +0100, Eric Engestrom wrote:
> These fields were added in 2d94601582 but never used; hasPresent was
> never set, while the other ones were set but never read.
I think this patch is wrong:
> - dri3_reply = xcb_dri3_query_version_reply(c, dri3_cookie, &error);
> - if
These fields were added in 2d94601582 but never used; hasPresent was
never set, while the other ones were set but never read.
Fixes: 2d94601582e4f0fcaf8c "Add DRI3+Present loader"
Cc: Keith Packard
Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom
---
Keith, did you mean to do something with these, or are they just
