On 2012-12-16 14:46:54 -0800, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Janne Grunau wrote:
> > On 2012-12-16 12:36:56 -0800, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 5:52 AM, Janne Grunau
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Nasm also fails on '%1 %+ SUFFIX' with
Hi,
On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Janne Grunau wrote:
> On 2012-12-16 12:36:56 -0800, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 5:52 AM, Janne Grunau wrote:
>> >
>> > Nasm also fails on '%1 %+ SUFFIX' with empty SUFFIX in cpuid.asm. It was
>> > previously working since it was alwa
On 2012-12-16 12:36:56 -0800, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
>
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 5:52 AM, Janne Grunau wrote:
> >
> > Nasm also fails on '%1 %+ SUFFIX' with empty SUFFIX in cpuid.asm. It was
> > previously working since it was always followed by ', %2'. Easiest
> > solution I've found was adding
Hi,
On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 5:52 AM, Janne Grunau wrote:
> On 2012-12-14 17:12:05 -0800, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 8:56 AM, Janne Grunau wrote:
>> > On 2012-12-14 08:32:14 -0800, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> On Dec 14, 2012 3:30 AM, "Janne Grun
On 2012-12-14 17:12:05 -0800, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 8:56 AM, Janne Grunau wrote:
> > On 2012-12-14 08:32:14 -0800, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Dec 14, 2012 3:30 AM, "Janne Grunau" wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Arguments on the stack are handled proper
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 8:56 AM, Janne Grunau wrote:
> On 2012-12-14 08:32:14 -0800, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Dec 14, 2012 3:30 AM, "Janne Grunau" wrote:
>> >
>> > Arguments on the stack are handled properly and functions can use more
>> > than arguments than the 7 registers a
On 2012-12-14 08:32:14 -0800, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Dec 14, 2012 3:30 AM, "Janne Grunau" wrote:
> >
> > Arguments on the stack are handled properly and functions can use more
> > than arguments than the 7 registers available on x86_32.
> > Fixes nasm build, yasm would fail too if i
Hi,
On Dec 14, 2012 3:30 AM, "Janne Grunau" wrote:
>
> Arguments on the stack are handled properly and functions can use more
> than arguments than the 7 registers available on x86_32.
> Fixes nasm build, yasm would fail too if it would error out on %error
> instead of just emitting a warning.
>
On 2012-12-14 14:48:06 +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 12:30:27PM +0100, Janne Grunau wrote:
> > Arguments on the stack are handled properly and functions can use more
> > than arguments than the 7 registers available on x86_32.
>
> more arguments than
editing error, fixed l
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 12:30:27PM +0100, Janne Grunau wrote:
> Arguments on the stack are handled properly and functions can use more
> than arguments than the 7 registers available on x86_32.
more arguments than
The patch is probably OK, but wait for more opinions just in case.
Diego
_
Arguments on the stack are handled properly and functions can use more
than arguments than the 7 registers available on x86_32.
Fixes nasm build, yasm would fail too if it would error out on %error
instead of just emitting a warning.
---
libavutil/x86/x86inc.asm | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-
11 matches
Mail list logo
