[cairo] [PATCH 14/41] drm/intel: intel_scaled_glyph_fini(): renamed local priv variable for better consistency

[Uli Schlachter]

Am 10.12.2015 um 23:16 schrieb Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult:
> Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <enrico.weigelt at gr13.net>
> ---
>  src/drm/cairo-drm-intel.c | 15 ++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/src/drm/cairo-drm-intel.c b/src/drm/cairo-drm-intel.c
> index a3bca03..525bb24 100644
> --- a/src/drm/cairo-drm-intel.c
> +++ b/src/drm/cairo-drm-intel.c
> @@ -965,15 +965,12 @@ void
>  intel_scaled_glyph_fini (cairo_scaled_glyph_t *scaled_glyph,
>  			 cairo_scaled_font_t  *scaled_font)
>  {
> -    intel_glyph_t *glyph;
> -
> -    glyph = scaled_glyph->surface_private;
> -    if (glyph != NULL) {
> -	/* XXX thread-safety? Probably ok due to the frozen scaled-font. */
> -	glyph->node.owner = NULL;
> -	if (! glyph->node.pinned)
> -	    _cairo_rtree_node_remove (&glyph->cache->rtree, &glyph->node);
> -    }
> +    intel_glyph_t *priv = scaled_glyph->surface_private;
> +
> +    /* XXX thread-safety? Probably ok due to the frozen scaled-font. */
> +    priv->node.owner = NULL;
> +    if (! priv->node.pinned)
> +	_cairo_rtree_node_remove (&priv->cache->rtree, &priv->node);
>  }

Uhm, this patch doesn't do at all what the commit message claims it does. I
don't see why removing this NULL check is safe and I think it's the more
important change than renaming the variable[0].

[0]: And I don't see the point in that renaming, but whatever...
-- 
"Are you preparing for another war, Plutarch?" I ask.
"Oh, not now. Now we're in that sweet period where everyone agrees that our
recent horrors should never be repeated," he says. "But collective thinking is
usually short-lived. We're fickle, stupid beings with poor memories and a great
gift for self-destruction.