Re: SIMD vs no SIMD on i686 (was: [Bug 3975] executable stack flag prevents use of libx264.so.148 with selinux in enforcing mode)
On Ter, 2016-07-19 at 02:55 +0200, dominik(a)greysector.net wrote:
Hello, Sérgio.
On Tuesday, 19 July 2016 at 02:35, RPM Fusion Bugzilla wrote:
>
> https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3975
>
> --- Comment #4 from Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com> 2016-07-19
> 02:35:19 CEST ---
> (In reply to comment #3)
> >
> > I'll take a look at this. Could you try running execstack -c on
> > the installed
> > library in the meantime?
> Be my guest , in meantime I read your thread on packaging Mailing
> list about
> sse3 , I'd like understand if we need 2 builds for i686 ... one
> with sse2 other
> without it, can you give us your opinion ?
The only real concern here are applications linked against libx264,
which someone might want to run on low-end hardware, because I don't
think anyone would want to encode anything to H.264 on non-SSE2
capable
CPU (i.e. Pentium 3 or Athlon XP and older). Considering last non-
SSE2
CPUs went out of production about 8 years ago, I think it's fairly
safe
to assume that the impact of doing SSE2-only builds would be
negligible,
if any.
From x264.spec we can read "#i686 is disabled on purpose -
re-enabled
with sse2 build"
It is safe to say enable sse2 build is enable asm code ? if yes %ifarch
i686 we can/should build with enable asm code ? and only one time
isn't it ? I tried that, but kwizart didn't agree ...
Regards,
Dominik
--
Sérgio M. B.