On 2/13/20 1:48 AM, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 9:58 AM Ilia Mirkin <imirkin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 6:23 AM Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> + for (unsigned i = 0; i < EDID_MAX_BLOCKS + 1; i++) {
>>>> + s_msgs[i][0].clear();
>>>> + s_msgs[i][1].clear();
>>>> + }
>>>
>>> I'm pretty sure that this for loop is not necessary. Can you drop this
>>> for loop and see if it works?
>>
>> The current code has:
>>
>> static void show_msgs(bool is_warn)
>> {
>> printf("\n%s:\n\n", is_warn ? "Warnings" : "Failures");
>> for (unsigned i = 0; i < state.num_blocks; i++) {
>> if (s_msgs[i][is_warn].empty())
>> continue;
>> print-the-error
>>
>> What would prevent an error from a previous run to appear without an
>> explicit clearing of s_msgs?
>
> Hi Hans,
>
> Do you agree with my assessment above?
>
> -ilia
>
You are right, sorry. I should have checked the actual code instead of
relying on my obviously faulty memory.
Regards,
Hans
