On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 7:01 AM Khem Raj <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 12:59 AM Tanu Kaskinen <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Sun, 2020-07-26 at 09:27 +0300, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2020-07-20 at 15:26 -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
>> > > On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 2:06 AM Tanu Kaskinen <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > > Hi!
>> > > >
>> > > > If a recipe provides NEON optimizations, should those be explicitly
>> > > > disabled when "neon" is not in TUNE_FEATUERS, even if the software is
>> > > > able to detect NEON availability at runtime?
>> > > >
>> > > > I'm currently converting the pulseaudio recipe from Autotools to Meson,
>> > > > and the old Autotools build system supports disabling NEON
>> > > > optimizations but the Meson build system doesn't. So I'm wondering if I
>> > > > should add the missing feature to the Meson build system, or just let
>> > > > the runtime detection do its work.
>> > > >
>> > > > Is there ever need for disabling NEON optimizations if the CPU
>> > > > indicates NEON support? I guess it could be useful for testing the "no
>> > > > NEON" case (I today found out that dropping "neon" from TUNE_FEATURES
>> > > > doesn't remove NEON support from the qemuarm machine), but otherwise it
>> > > > seems unnecessary, unless there are CPUs that advertise NEON support
>> > > > but don't actually support it.
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > I think the issue will result in a compiler error perhaps when neon is
>> > > disabled via
>> > > compiler command line which would be the case when neon is not in 
>> > > TUNE_FEATURES
>> > > the compiler might warn or error out when it finds neon instructions
>> > > being compiled via inline
>> > > assembly.  you just can try passing something like -mfpu=vfpv3d16 or
>> > > some such and see if
>> > > compiler/assembler complains during build, if not then perhaps its fine.
>> >
>> > If the last -mfpu is something else than neon, then including
>> > arm_neon.h will succeed but compiling neon code will fail.
>> >
>> > I did some experiments, and what I found was that when I remove neon
>> > from TUNE_FEATURES, OE adds -mfpu=vfp to CC, not CFLAGS, so it's very
>> > early in the compiler command line. PulseAudio adds -mfpu=neon to
>> > CFLAGS when building neon code, and the last -mfpu wins, so the neon
>> > code gets built without errors.
>> >
>> > The configure check in PulseAudio only checks that the compiler accepts
>> > -mfpu=neon and #include <arm_neon.h>, it doesn't try to compile any
>> > actual neon code. This means that if the user adds -mfpu=vfp (or other
>> > non-neon) to CFLAGS rather than CC, configure will pass but building
>> > will fail. Is this something to guard against? A default qemuarm build
>> > doesn't do this, so I don't know if this ever happens in OE.
>> >
>> > I don't know yet how Meson behaves, I'll continue testing...
>>
>> I tested Meson now. Meson too enables Neon even if -mfpu=vfp is in CC.
>> Unlike Autotools, Meson doesn't fail if -mfpu=vfp is added to CFLAGS (I
>> tried CFLAGS_append = " -mfpu=vfp" in the pulseaudio recipe). Neon is
>> enabled in any case.
>>
>> So, Meson seems pretty safe, although I guess it would be nice not to
>> override the user's -mfpu setting. I think this isn't a big problem is
>> practice, since runtime detection works.
>>
>> I haven't tested with a compiler that truly can't build Neon code,
>> because I don't know how to do that.

Presumably set a -mcpu=XXX to something which can never support NEON?

> Right. Cpu implementations without neon do exist
>  But they are perhaps rare enough and may not use the package too so chances 
> are slim that we encounter this issue

So what's the conclusion? That CPU's without NEON are so rare that OE
doesn't need to care about them?
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#141015): 
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/141015
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/75658822/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub  
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to