From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pbcl.net (pbcl.net [159.69.221.92]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web12.255.1624909959754743737 for ; Mon, 28 Jun 2021 12:52:40 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=missing; spf=pass (domain: pbcl.net, ip: 159.69.221.92, mailfrom: pb@pbcl.net) Received: from pb by pbcl.net with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lxxJ8-0007qD-B3; Mon, 28 Jun 2021 21:52:38 +0200 Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2021 21:52:38 +0200 From: "Phil Blundell" To: Khem Raj Cc: Andrea Adami , Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [OE-core] RFC: pulseaudio vs. meson vs. neon Message-ID: <20210628195238.GG5525@pbcl.net> References: <6e2bcb94-8b02-50c1-bf5b-8fc3ce464d91@gmail.com> <20210628191055.GF5525@pbcl.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 12:42:55PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 12:10 PM Phil Blundell wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 11:46:08AM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > > > I still hope that if we can add a proper neon detection patch to meson > > > they would be ok to accept it. > > > > Why doesn't the runtime detection work in the way that upstream clearly > > think it ought to? > > probably it does, someone has to test it on device without vfp. > Currently it is still failing to compile. > so first that needs to be fixed. Okay, but if the runtime detection does in fact work then there's no need for any NEON detection in Meson, right? p.