"Ronald S. Bultje" <[email protected]> writes: > Hi, > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> wrote: >> ff_get_cpu_flags_x86() requires cpuid(), which is conditionally defined >> elsewhere in the file. Surrounding the function body with ifdefs allows >> building even when cpuid is not defined. An empty cpuflags mask is >> returned in this case. >> --- >> libavutil/x86/cpu.c | 4 ++++ >> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
What configuration does this affect? > I don't like this. I remember someone not testing his cpumask patch a > while ago, causing all of fate to run (silently, and undetected for a > good hour) in pure C on all x86 machines. That mistake had nothing to do with this patch. > Running in pure C should not go undetected and especially not silent. > I prefer if this fails to compile, so we can _fix_ it instead of > pretending to support a machine that we don't. For such machines, > --disable-mmx or similar is good enough as a hack, right? I'm fine > with some kind of a very loud warning also. There is currently only a problem if building with a compiler that supports neither inline asm nor cpuid intrinsics. I don't know of such a compiler. -- Måns Rullgård [email protected] _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
