[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Update x264 asm code to latest version (fixes Win64 issues)
Fri Jul 31 21:49:35 CEST 2009
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Michael Niedermayer<michaelni at gmx.at> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 10:55:22AM +0100, John Adcock wrote:
>> 2009/7/30 John Adcock <dscaler.johnad at googlemail.com>:
>> > 2009/7/30 Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at>:
>> >> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 05:30:41PM +0100, John Adcock wrote:
>> >>> Attached patch fixes issues using yasm code on Win64 due to different
>> >>> calling convention rules?by updating x264 files to be the same as
>> >>> latest version. ?Win64 patches originally by Anton Mitrofanov.
>> >>> John
>> >>> ?fft_mmx.asm ? ? ? ? ? | ? ?2
>> >>> ?h264_deblock_sse2.asm | ? 86 +++++++-------
>> >>> ?h264_idct_sse2.asm ? ?| ? ?2
>> >>> ?x86inc.asm ? ? ? ? ? ?| ?243 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>> >>> ?x86util.asm ? ? ? ? ? | ?307 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>> >>> ?5 files changed, 506 insertions(+), 134 deletions(-)
>> >>> 17d2828435ad3bc6e0d3ec5e6898947b3e1b226f ?win64fixes.patch
>> >> if this just updated the files to the latest while presering local changes
>> >> and it has been tested and works then its ok
>> > Apologies, I've noticed I've missed part of the changes to
>> > h264_idct_sse2.asm, I'll send a new patch in the morning.
>> New patch attached.
> same comment as with the last one, and actually its true in general
> updating stuff we borrowed from other projects is generally ok if
> nothing else is done, local changes are preserved and its all tested
> and the patch submitter/others are not aware of anything that would need
> disscussion ...
I approve of it as long as it's tested and works.
More information about the ffmpeg-devel