Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 16:53:43 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: multimedia@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 257124] multimedia/ffmpeg: Fails to link: ld: error: inline assembly requires more registers than available at line [on i386 with LTO option] Message-ID: <bug-257124-12827-snhD2M2IlR@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-257124-12827@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-257124-12827@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D257124 --- Comment #9 from Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> --- (In reply to Mikhail Teterin from comment #7) > I'm confused... Is not the number of registers the same on the same proce= ssor > -- whether it is running in 32- or 64-bit mode? Even if they are > named/accessed differently? amd64 has r8 through r15 in addition to the 64-bit versions of the common registers (rax, rbx etc.) > Frankly, if optimization results in errors, then it is not an optimizatio= n... > I don't blame anyone here for the failure, just debating terminology :-) Perhaps a non-functional optimization, but indeed it doesn't really matter. > If the otherwise valid code cannot be compiled (and/or linked), than it i= s a > compiler (and/or linker) bug, is not it? Would it make sense to bring thi= s up > with LLVM-project directly? Perhaps, although I suspect there will not be a lot of interest in investigating i386-specific optimization issues. > I would've thought, with multimedia every CPU-instruction counts... Even = if > the hardware is fast enough for regular realtime playback, when performing > format-conversions, CPU is almost always the bottleneck even on the faste= st > computers. Indeed, no disagreement that optimization is desirable on multimedia ports.= My point is just that there is likely to be little developer effort available (upstream or in FreeBSD) to work on these issues on i386. > Perhaps, the option should carry a warning -- and be disabled by default = on > i386 -- but disabling it altogether seems too drastic. I believe it is disabled by default on all archs right now? The option should be a warning, error, or not available on i386; I don't ha= ve strong feelings on which it is. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-257124-12827-snhD2M2IlR>