https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=357059
--- Comment #4 from Janne Grunau <janne-...@jannau.net> --- (In reply to Julian Seward from comment #2) > I'm not sure your test program is correct. The tag word is 16 bits > at byte offsets 8 and 9, but the program tests fenv[9] and [10]. > > That said .. even after changing the 9 and 10 to 8 and 9, it still > gives different results natively vs on V. So something's up here. Oops, yes, the sample program is wrong but the real check uses the correct offset: https://git.libav.org/?p=libav.git;a=blob;f=tests/checkasm/x86/checkasm.asm;h=55212fc24b3be71f25eb3e9f8066bd2cee1c5eef;hb=HEAD#l227 > Is this just a curiosity, or is it causing a problem for you? It's more than curiosity. We added tests for handwritten asm in libav (see tests/checkasm/). It also checks if the asm follows calling convention. I.e restores callee saved registers, makes no assumption of the upper half of int arguments on 64-bit targets and checks if the fpu state was restored properly. The latter check failed under valgrind on a function using cvtpi2ps with a memory operand and no other MMX usage. It only affects a function targeting SSE which will be only used if SSE2 is not available so I added the emms in https://git.libav.org/?p=libav.git;a=commitdiff;h=8563f9887194b07c972c3475d6b51592d77f73f7 . So it's not really a problem for us although there is still the issue that valgrind's behaviour differs from all CPU I tested. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
