[opus] CMake patches

Tue Apr 7 10:47:21 UTC 2020

Did the patch 5 split / AVX fix work get merged at all, I didn't see any
more mails about it?

Thanks!

On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 21:34, Marcus Asteborg <xnorpx at outlook.com> wrote:

> Awesome thanks! Good comments.
>
> Please apply patch 1-4 and I prepare another iteration on patch 5 for you
> too look at.
>
> //Marcus
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 14, 2020 08:24
> *To:* Marcus Asteborg <xnorpx at outlook.com>
> *Cc:* Simon Jackson <simon.jackson at sonocent.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [opus] CMake patches
>
> Hi Marcus,
>
> So I looked at the patches and have no issue with patches 1-4. For
> patches 5 I have a few comments/questions.
>
> - The patch should probably be split in 3 (alloca, fast-math, and
> SSE/AVX) to be clearer and easier to bisect if something goes wrong.
> - About the alloca part, I'm not sure I understand what's happening but
> it looks like alloca gets enabled only with MSVC and not gcc? That's
> fine if gcc gets VAR_ARRAYS instead, but otherwise it's suboptimal and
> may lead to problems.
> - About FLOAT_APPROX, this is not the same as -ffast-math. FLOAT_APPROX
> means that the code will approximate functions like exp() and log() by
> directly playing with the bits *assuming* that the float data is in IEEE
> 754 format. That's the case for x86 and ARM, but there are odd
> architectures that implement non-754 float. Enabling FLOAT_APPROX on
> those would break Opus badly. So it would be best to only enable
> FLOAT_APPROX on archs that are known to have 754 float.
> - About SSE/AVX, I read the post about why MAY_HAVE could break with
> MSVC. Note that the Opus codebase uses static for every function defined
> in header files, so that part shouldn't be a problem. OTOH, the math.h
> problem may still be there. If you have a way to solve the math.h
> problem, cpu detection on MSVC might be an option though.
>
> Cheers,
>
>         Jean-Marc
>
>
> On 1/9/20 12:48 AM, Marcus Asteborg wrote:
> > Ping @Jean-Marc Valin <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>> !
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > *From:* Simon Jackson <simon.jackson at sonocent.com>
> > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 8, 2020 09:54
> > *To:* Marcus Asteborg <xnorpx at outlook.com>
> > *Cc:* opus at xiph.org <opus at xiph.org>; Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca
> >
> > *Subject:* Re: [opus] CMake patches
> > Hi,
> >
> > This is great! I've literally run into the SSE/AVX issue over the past
> > two days and was about to start putting together a PR myself. When using
> > libopus compiled with the CMake toolchain on the Google Android
> > emulator, `-mavx` causes SIGILL because it's vectorising the variadic
> > function parameters and the emulator doesn't support AVX. I'd really
> > appreciate if these make their way into master quickly because this has
> > been causing me a bit of a headache.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > On Wed, 18 Dec 2019 at 00:00, Marcus Asteborg <xnorpx at outlook.com
> > <mailto:xnorpx at outlook.com <xnorpx at outlook.com>>> wrote:
> >
> >     Hi all,
> >
> >     With some downtime it's time for some CMake fixes.
> >
> >     Most critically is the SSE fixes to avoid crashes that is described
> >     in 154 and 132 in github. Patch 5 should address this and also
> >     adding APPROX-FLOAT option.
> >     Hopefully this can give some gains for those of us running on
> >     Windows servers.j
> >
> >     I went through the pull request and picked out a few that will ease
> >     up integration for consumers of Opus. Those patches are also added
> >     here with the original authors as commiters.
> >
> >     I will go through the rest of the CMake related pull requests as
> >     well later this week.
> >
> >     It would be nice to setup a CI-Pipeline with CMake builds whoever
> >     owns that on feel free to reach out to me and I can do the work
> needed.
> >
> >     //Marcus
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     opus mailing list
> >     opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org <opus at xiph.org>>
> >
> https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.xiph.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fopus&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cc15671b24d8e491dc19508d7990e4df7%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637146159020540767&sdata=GdeehvmtVJ2EIjN9ZbfFBhVVfQHR4jaOoQoqeHhhZAY%3D&reserved=0
> >     <
> https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.xiph.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fopus&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cc15671b24d8e491dc19508d7990e4df7%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637146159020540767&sdata=GdeehvmtVJ2EIjN9ZbfFBhVVfQHR4jaOoQoqeHhhZAY%3D&reserved=0
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/opus/attachments/20200407/59057f4e/attachment.html>