On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 1:05 PM, Jose Gonzalez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gustavo wrote: > >> Ok, stop you guys! >> >> I cannot say for sure since I never played with mmx that much, but I >> fear raster is right about that. >> >> as for thread safety, registers do not need special care for threads, >> no locks or other requirements, so yes, it should not have any special >> care. >> >> > > The issue isn't one of safety in the sense of circular > referencing, it's mmx/fp 'safety', ie. that we know for certain > that the execution paths aren't being interrupted in such a way > that although you think you've released mmx registers, and thus > the next guy is free to use fp ops.. that maybe isn't so.
I believe it's up to OS to save/restore all the registers when you change threads. Am I wrong? > There is much too great a difference in the behavior of the > code with vs. without pipes to say for certain that the code-execution > paths are well understood. But do you remember my tests where I disabled the other threads, just launching one and still having this behavior? Also, as I reported to you in private, the "src" was being calculated fine, remember that I said that if I just copy the src to dst I was getting the "correct" gradient, but of course it was not being placed in the correct angle. -- Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri http://profusion.mobi embedded systems -------------------------------------- MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype: gsbarbieri Mobile: +55 (19) 9225-2202 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
