İsmail Dönmez <[email protected]> writes:

> Hi;
>
> 2012/3/22 Måns Rullgård <[email protected]>
>
>> Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>> > On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 01:55:01PM +0000, Måns Rullgård wrote:
>> >> "Ronald S. Bultje" <[email protected]> writes:
>> >> > 2012/3/20 Måns Rullgård <[email protected]>:
>> >> >> "Ronald S. Bultje" <[email protected]> writes:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> Found-by: Mateusz "j00ru" Jurczyk and Gynvael Coldwind
>> >> >>> ---
>> >> >>>  libavcodec/x86/cabac.h     |   15 ++++++++++-----
>> >> >>>  libavcodec/x86/h264_i386.h |   18 ++++++++++++------
>> >> >>>  2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> --- a/libavcodec/x86/cabac.h
>> >> >>> +++ b/libavcodec/x86/cabac.h
>> >> >>> @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> -#define BRANCHLESS_GET_CABAC(ret, statep, low, lowword, range,
>> tmp, tmpbyte, byte) \
>> >> >>> +#define BRANCHLESS_GET_CABAC(ret, statep, low, lowword, range,
>> tmp, tmpbyte, byte, end) \
>> >> >>>          "movzbl "statep"    , "ret"
>>   \n\t"\
>> >> >>>          "mov    "range"     , "tmp"
>>   \n\t"\
>> >> >>>          "and    $0xC0       , "range"
>>   \n\t"\
>> >> >>> @@ -64,9 +64,12 @@
>> >> >>>          "shl    %%cl        , "low"
>>   \n\t"\
>> >> >>>          "mov    "tmpbyte"   , "statep"
>>  \n\t"\
>> >> >>>          "test   "lowword"   , "lowword"
>>   \n\t"\
>> >> >>> -        " jnz   1f
>>  \n\t"\
>> >> >>> +        " jnz   2f
>>  \n\t"\
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Why do you renumber these?  Number labels don't need to be in
>> ascending
>> >> >> order or anything like that.
>> >> >
>> >> > Because it's cleaner.
>> >>
>> >> The patch certainly is not.
>> >
>> > How does this comment help us move forward?
>> >
>> > Thanks for sharing your opinion with us, but we heard you loud and clear
>> > the first time around.
>> >
>> > The labels get renumbered, so be it.  Now let's move on towards solving
>> > the problem at hand, which is the overread and the compiler magic.
>>
>> Why are you so hostile?  Are you also on google payroll now?
>
> This is getting off topic. Lets concentrate on the patch itself.

This is not off-topic.  It is about Ronald going mental because I dared
question the quality of a patch he submitted on behalf of the almighty,
infallible Google.

-- 
Måns Rullgård
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to