Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] libav.inc: duplicate armv7a over-rides for armv7ve

[Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Mon, 2016-01-11 at 14:58 -0800, Khem Raj wrote:
> > On Jan 7, 2016, at 3:40 PM, Phil Blundell <pb@pbcl.net> wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, 2016-01-07 at 14:29 -0800, Andre McCurdy wrote:
> > > FULL_OPTIMIZATION_armv7a = "-fexpensive-optimizations -fomit
> > > -frame-pointer -O4 -ffast-math"
> > > +FULL_OPTIMIZATION_armv7ve = "-fexpensive-optimizations -fomit
> > > -frame-pointer -O4 -ffast-math"
> > 
> 
> O4 ? may be just replace this whole thing with -Ofast now a days
> -fexpensive-optimizations is enabled at -O2,-O3 anyway same for fomit
> -frame-pointer and -Ofast turns on
> feast-match on top of -O3
> 
> > I wonder if this would be better as just FULL_OPTIMIZATION_arm. 
> >  That
> > said, the OPTIMIZATION variables are primarily distro knobs and
> > it's not
> > entirely clear that individual packages ought to be overriding them
> > at
> > all.
> > 
> > Does anybody know whether there is any actual science behind the
> > use of
> > those flags on armv7a specifically?
> 
> it came into ffmpeg circa 2008 and proliferated into related
> components primarily to support vectorization and neon
> which was quite nascent for ARM architecture in those days in gcc.
> Today if you were to configure libav with default options
> then it uses mainly -fomit-frame-pointer-O3 -fno-math-errno -fno
> -signed-zeros -fno-tree-vectorize
> 
> which is primarily -Ofast -fno-tree-vectorize

I have to admit that my personal instinct on these is simply to remove
them. I doubt they're buying much now and if people really want to tune
specific recipes by hand they still can do so from their local/distro
config.

Cheers,

Richard