On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 02:23:12PM +0000, Måns Rullgård wrote: > İsmail Dönmez <[email protected]> writes: > > 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.
We will talk about this and other things when all parties have cooled down, but we will surely not have a trollfest here on this mailing list. If you guys continue posting into this thread I will ask for the mailing list to be set on moderation until the flamewar is over and for all flames to be discarded. Diego _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
