[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] fix h264_deblock_sse2.asm segfaults on clang/x86-32

[Michael Niedermayer]

On Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 10:09:20AM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> writes:
> 
> > On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 06:06:11PM +0200, Reimar D?ffinger wrote:
> >> On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 07:43:29AM -0400, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> >> > We can optimize the code for compilers that do realign the way we want
> >> > if people prefer that.
> >> 
> >> If there's no measurable slowdown that would just make things worse
> >> in the maintainability sense I think.
> >> But since the majority does not seem to consider "ignore clang for now"
> >> an option I withdraw any objections (well, I mostly meant to ask rather
> >> than object anyway).
> >
> > supporting plain C with clang is all fine but to support clang with
> > asm optimizations clang first must support the feature set we require
> > for that and maintaining alignment is one of these.
> > I dont mind if people disable optimized code for clang or add such
> > workarounds conditional on the compiler being clang.
> > But iam against such workarounds being added as if it was a bugfix
> > because once clang will be fixed all these hacks would then be forgoten
> > without ifdef clang/buggy_whatever. And there are enough hacks in the
> > code that noone knows why they where added
> 
> Not aligning the stack is not a bug.

is there any relation between your statement and the discussion or what i
said?

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
-- Diogenes of Sinope
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20100902/6a29fdbe/attachment.pgp>