[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 1/2] util: Fix foreach_list_typed_safe when exec_node is not at offset 0.
Matt Turner
mattst88 at gmail.com
Mon Mar 9 19:24:10 PDT 2015
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 6:36 PM, Kenneth Graunke <kenneth at whitecape.org> wrote:
> From: Jason Ekstrand <jason.ekstrand at intel.com>
>
> __next and __prev are pointers to the structure containing the exec_node
> link, not the embedded exec_node. NULL checks would fail unless the
> embedded exec_node happened to be at offset 0 in the parent struct.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jason Ekstrand <jason.ekstrand at intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Kenneth Graunke <kenneth at whitecape.org>
> ---
> src/glsl/list.h | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/glsl/list.h b/src/glsl/list.h
> index ddb98f7..680e963 100644
> --- a/src/glsl/list.h
> +++ b/src/glsl/list.h
> @@ -684,7 +684,7 @@ inline void exec_node::insert_before(exec_list *before)
> exec_node_data(__type, (__list)->head, __field), \
> * __next = \
> exec_node_data(__type, (__node)->__field.next, __field); \
> - __next != NULL; \
> + &__next->__field != NULL; \
I'm not understanding now the address of __next->__field can ever be NULL.
__next is something with an embedded struct exec_node, so don't we
want "__next->__field != NULL" without the address-of operator?
> __node = __next, __next = \
> exec_node_data(__type, (__next)->__field.next, __field))
>
> @@ -693,7 +693,7 @@ inline void exec_node::insert_before(exec_list *before)
> exec_node_data(__type, (__list)->tail_pred, __field), \
> * __prev = \
> exec_node_data(__type, (__node)->__field.prev, __field); \
> - __prev != NULL; \
> + &__prev->__field != NULL; \
> __node = __prev, __prev = \
> exec_node_data(__type, (__prev)->__field.prev, __field))
>
> --
> 2.2.2
>
> _______________________________________________
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
More information about the mesa-dev
mailing list