[Mesa-dev] dead code

[Rob Clark]

On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Rob Clark <robdclark at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
> <enrico.weigelt at gr13.net> wrote:
>> On 03.08.2016 13:25, Rob Clark wrote:
>>
>>> Probably it would be on a case-by-case basis.  There are at least a
>>> few places with some useful debug code, ie. not the kind that you'd
>>> normally enable, but stuff you'd want if you were making changes in
>>> those areas..
>>
>> In those cases, shouldn't we instead introduce proper #define's ?
>
> At least in the cases I am thinking of, I'm not sure I really see the
> value in that..  it isn't really stuff I'd ask a user to turn on.  (If
> it came to that, I'd just ask the user to send me an apitrace so that
> I could debug, and possibly change some #if 0 to #if 1, and/or add
> other debug code in the process.)
>
> There is a DEBUG define that is enabled for --enable-debug builds, but
> most of the #if 0 debug code I've seen is stuff that is either too
> much overhead, or too much printf spam for debug builds.
>
> Anyways, I'm not saying there aren't some #if 0's that could be
> removed.. some look relatively trivial and easy enough to recreate.
> And/or useless.  I'm just saying we shouldn't blindly remove them all.
>
> And I wouldn't be surprised if there were some '#ifdef SOMETHING's
> that are actually worth removing.

just fyi, as far as clean-up tasks, fixing coverity[1] issues is a
good thing.. it does require requesting access, since I guess by
default the issues are not visible without being granted access (which
in more security sensitive projects, at least, makes sense)

[1] https://scan.coverity.com/projects/mesa