From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-la0-f43.google.com (mail-la0-f43.google.com [209.85.215.43]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A58E36EC6B for ; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 21:45:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-la0-f43.google.com with SMTP id pv20so2807199lab.2 for ; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 13:45:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3EKpJDCfXgm9w8pCSwlfljJxjoIWfIDjvdOdGcY6HJg=; b=yHY2ScJHyNjdIMZ2lePGJWtFwgWiTynHP6a7dz53D9wHoJv5sRrTpM/hz3717Np4ZJ YUdlnNf82YbCZR9WXNcXO5Dtmppk5+mKxwMV7DWgEe0+zxjgNA55bGTbFz2M2fAP7rii HfaAR5n45E8tkLUCGShTx8pbLO0FlnFhDj+5D4PM3d2ehFnvGHoLRR+wscV3pUkjtcV3 sC1IVrhb4VTp3YEm5QPyxOLjfZo4IRu/JSYGaRSTaQ5lr3cywJ9Jlp9gRJkl3xrVj7Ub qGS7y7Pkb8PONZsK+tXjFp41lYHfGuNL4ENuGy/LvX+C10+GT9y8qfP4iJsBzYhA5tqx xwbg== X-Received: by 10.112.150.6 with SMTP id ue6mr5207887lbb.86.1393019150520; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 13:45:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.43.169] (c-5eeaaa31-74736162.cust.telenor.se. [94.234.170.49]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id cu8sm8977061lbb.12.2014.02.21.13.45.48 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 21 Feb 2014 13:45:49 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <5307C90B.3080804@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 22:45:47 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?David_Nystr=F6m?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Phil Blundell References: <1392991017-3524-1-git-send-email-david.c.nystrom@gmail.com> <53079ABF.2090204@linux.intel.com> <1393017641.2640.21.camel@e130.pbcl.net> In-Reply-To: <1393017641.2640.21.camel@e130.pbcl.net> Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [PATCH] x264: SPE is not compatible with Altivec X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 21:45:54 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2014-02-21 22:20, Phil Blundell wrote: > On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 20:40 +0100, David Nystrom wrote: >> Perhaps you know this already, but e500v2 is a cpu arch, same as >> armv5. > Is that really true? I thought e500v2 was an actual core and the > equivalent architecture was Power v2.03 or something. Yes, good point. I understand Sauls concern. > >> For future reference, should all ppc related CPU-arch specific stuff >> be directed to the FSL bsp ? > Since we do ship tune-ppce500.inc in oe-core, I think it makes sense to > also include the overrides necessary to make compilation work with SPE > enabled. It doesn't seem unreasonable that users would expect that the > recipes in oe-core would work with a configuration that comes as > standard. > > However, adding overrides for e500v2 specifically does seem like a bad > plan since we will then end up having to duplicate the thing for every > other non-altivec configuration. Can you come up with some override > that will apply to all SPE configurations, Yep, will return with V2. > or failing that a patch for > the configure script that will disable the altivec assembler if it > notices that ${CC} is configured for SPE? > > p. > >