<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Assertion "(_cairo_atomic_int_get (&(&surface->ref_count)->ref_count) > 0)"" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=91967#c20">Comment # 20</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Assertion "(_cairo_atomic_int_get (&(&surface->ref_count)->ref_count) > 0)"" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=91967">bug 91967</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:alberts.muktupavels@gmail.com" title="Alberts Muktupāvels <alberts.muktupavels@gmail.com>"> Alberts Muktupāvels</a> <pre>(In reply to Jaroslav Škarvada from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=91967#c19">comment #19</a>) > AFAICS the &image->base is pointer to the same memory as image, it's just > different pointer type. Maybe there is a better fix, e.g. to just BAIL or > return some error, but this problem needs definitely to be fixed. Just > ignoring it will not help anyone. I think that BAIL-ing out is not solution... Looking at code it looks like it was intention to try with shm first and if that fails try with other methods. BAIL-ing out we will lose chance to get image surface with other methods. Basically this is very simple bug - double free with very simple fix. Surface was destroyed, pointer now is invalid. Setting it to NULL makes sense.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>