Mercurial > mplayer.hg
changeset 24437:2f31f31deccc
Remove test for SSE exception support that has been commented out since ages.
| author | reimar |
|---|---|
| date | Fri, 14 Sep 2007 13:25:20 +0000 |
| parents | c1b98b43b897 |
| children | 999a0a1e4748 |
| files | cpudetect.c |
| diffstat | 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) [+] |
line wrap: on
line diff
--- a/cpudetect.c Fri Sep 14 12:52:13 2007 +0000 +++ b/cpudetect.c Fri Sep 14 13:25:20 2007 +0000 @@ -441,31 +441,6 @@ } } - /* Emulate test for OSXMMEXCPT in CR4. The OS will set this bit if - * it supports unmasked SIMD FPU exceptions. If we unmask the - * exceptions, do a SIMD divide-by-zero and get a SIGILL, the OS - * doesn't support unmasked SIMD FPU exceptions. If we get a SIGFPE - * as expected, we're okay but we need to clean up after it. - * - * Are we being too stringent in our requirement that the OS support - * unmasked exceptions? Certain RedHat 2.2 kernels enable SSE by - * setting CR4.OSFXSR but don't support unmasked exceptions. Win98 - * doesn't even support them. We at least know the user-space SSE - * support is good in kernels that do support unmasked exceptions, - * and therefore to be safe I'm going to leave this test in here. - */ - if ( gCpuCaps.hasSSE ) { - mp_msg(MSGT_CPUDETECT,MSGL_V, "Testing OS support for SSE unmasked exceptions... " ); - -// test_os_katmai_exception_support(); - - if ( gCpuCaps.hasSSE ) { - mp_msg(MSGT_CPUDETECT,MSGL_V, "yes.\n" ); - } else { - mp_msg(MSGT_CPUDETECT,MSGL_V, "no!\n" ); - } - } - /* Restore the original signal handlers. */ sigaction( SIGILL, &saved_sigill, NULL );