<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" /> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - XCOM: Enemy Unknown Causes lockup" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80419#c97">Comment # 97</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - XCOM: Enemy Unknown Causes lockup" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80419">bug 80419</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:jfonseca@vmware.com" title="Jose Fonseca <jfonseca@vmware.com>"> Jose Fonseca</a> <pre>I'm pushing a slightly modified version of Roland's patch. (In reply to Nicolai Hähnle from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=80419#c96">comment #96</a>) > Created <a href="attachment.cgi?id=120742" name="attach_120742" title="more conservative apitrace patch">attachment 120742</a> <a href="attachment.cgi?id=120742&action=edit" title="more conservative apitrace patch">[details]</a> > more conservative apitrace patch > > For what it's worth, I've attached a modified version of Roland's patch that > is slightly more conservative, guarding against some stupid end values and > checking the indices. Not sure which patch is really better though, in the > end it depends on how much broken software is out there. As far as I can > tell, XCOM apitraces work with both variants. Yes, I don't think this is necessary. If apitrace needs more resiliency, then the best approach would be to setup a segv handler to cope with out-of-bounds reads. This code path is only used for user arrays. (VBOs don't need this special treatment.)</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>