[Openchrome-devel] openchrome bug

[Thomas Hellström]

Jon Nettleton wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 7:19 PM, Bartosz Kosiorek <gang65 at poczta.onet.pl> wrote:
>   
>> Hi.
>> I found bug in libxvmc/viaLowLevel.c
>> The function always return 0, even if drmCommandWriteRead was failed.
>> I think it should be:
>>
>> -       if (drmCommandWriteRead(xl->fd, DRM_VIA_ALLOCMEM, &xl->tsMem,
>> -               sizeof(xl->tsMem)) < 0)
>> +       if ((ret = drmCommandWriteRead(xl->fd, DRM_VIA_ALLOCMEM, &xl->tsMem,
>> +               sizeof(xl->tsMem))) < 0)
>>            return ret;
>>
>> I also use common code convention for "drmCommandRead",
>> "drmCommandWriteRead"  and "drmCommandWrite", to avoid mistakes.
>>
>> The return values of the functions: "drmCommandRead",
>> "drmCommandWriteRead"  and "drmCommandWrite" should be zero on
>> success, or a negative values on failure.
>>
>>     
>
> Bartosz,
>
> Thanks for your time and effort.  I have checked in the parts of the
> patch that would functionally change the way the code works.  I have
> not checked in syntax of the logic changes that you submitted because
> it would break code uniformity with most of the xorg drivers that
> exist.
>
> Could someone else on the list that has more history with xorg give us
> some understanding why when checking the ret of drmCommand functions
> we use this?
>
>  - if (ret) {
>
> instead of
>
>  + if (ret < 0) {
>
>
> If there is a reason other than personal preference to change this I
> will.  My take is to stick with the rest of the community on this one.
>
> Jon
>
>   
Jon,
There is no particular reason. Any of the above forms should do.

Thomas