Script 'mail_helper' called by obssrc
Hello community,

here is the log from the commit of package xxhash for openSUSE:Factory checked 
in at 2024-09-05 15:46:00
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Comparing /work/SRC/openSUSE:Factory/xxhash (Old)
 and      /work/SRC/openSUSE:Factory/.xxhash.new.10096 (New)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Package is "xxhash"

Thu Sep  5 15:46:00 2024 rev:12 rq:1198762 version:0.8.2

Changes:
--------
--- /work/SRC/openSUSE:Factory/xxhash/xxhash.changes    2024-05-07 
18:02:02.807546480 +0200
+++ /work/SRC/openSUSE:Factory/.xxhash.new.10096/xxhash.changes 2024-09-05 
15:46:02.829235505 +0200
@@ -1,0 +2,5 @@
+Tue Sep  3 02:11:09 UTC 2024 - Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
+
+- Add inline.patch to resolve FTBFS on gcc-14 + -Og.
+
+-------------------------------------------------------------------

New:
----
  _scmsync.obsinfo
  build.specials.obscpio
  inline.patch

BETA DEBUG BEGIN:
  New:
- Add inline.patch to resolve FTBFS on gcc-14 + -Og.
BETA DEBUG END:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Other differences:
------------------
++++++ xxhash.spec ++++++
--- /var/tmp/diff_new_pack.vXe8lE/_old  2024-09-05 15:46:03.653269401 +0200
+++ /var/tmp/diff_new_pack.vXe8lE/_new  2024-09-05 15:46:03.653269401 +0200
@@ -24,9 +24,11 @@
 Group:          Productivity/Security
 URL:            https://github.com/Cyan4973/xxHash
 Source0:        
https://github.com/Cyan4973/xxHash/archive/v%{version}.tar.gz#/xxHash-%{version}.tar.gz
-Patch0:         test-tools-do-not-override-cflags.patch
+Patch1:         test-tools-do-not-override-cflags.patch
+Patch2:         inline.patch
 BuildRequires:  gcc-c++
-BuildRequires:  pkgconfig
+BuildRequires:  pkg-config
+%{?suse_build_hwcaps_libs}
 
 %description
 xxHash is a hash algorithm. It completes the SMHasher test suite which
@@ -34,38 +36,41 @@
 Hashes are identical on all platforms.
 
 %package -n libxxhash0
-Summary:        Shared library for xxHash - a non-cryptographic hash algorithm
+Summary:        Non-cryptographic hash algorithm
 License:        BSD-2-Clause
 Group:          System/Libraries
 
 %description -n libxxhash0
-Shared library for xxHash - a hash algorithm. It completes the SMHasher test
-suite which evaluates collision, dispersion and randomness qualities of hash
-functions. Hashes are identical on all platforms.
+xxHash is a hash algorithm. It completes the SMHasher test suite which
+evaluates collision, dispersion and randomness qualities of hash functions.
+Hashes are identical on all platforms.
 
 %package devel
-Summary:        Development files for xxHash - a non-cryptographic hash 
algorithm
+Summary:        Headers for xxHash, a non-cryptographic hash algorithm
 License:        BSD-2-Clause
 Group:          Development/Libraries/C and C++
 Requires:       %{name} = %{version}
 Requires:       libxxhash0 = %{version}
 
 %description devel
-Development files for xxHash - a hash algorithm. It completes the SMHasher test
-suite which evaluates collision, dispersion and randomness qualities of hash
-functions. Hashes are identical on all platforms.
+Headers and other development files for xxHash.
 
 %prep
 %autosetup -p1 -n xxHash-%{version}
 
 %build
-export CFLAGS="%{optflags}"
-export CXXFLAGS="%{optflags}"
+# ALLOW_AVX just means "we guarantee we policed our %%optflags".
+export CFLAGS="%{optflags} -DXXH_X86DISPATCH_ALLOW_AVX=1"
+export CXXFLAGS="$CFLAGS"
 export LDFLAGS="%{?build_ldflags}"
+# DISPATCH=1 if you want AVX2/AVX512. But it does not seem to perform any
+# better than the lowest-denomimation code on at least the 1135G7 and 5950X
+# CPUs, and for both LP64 as well as ILP32 — it seems to be all within 
margin
+# of error.
 %make_build prefix=%{_prefix} libdir=%{_libdir}
 
 %install
-export CFLAGS="%{optflags}"
+export CFLAGS="%{optflags} -DXXH_X86DISPATCH_ALLOW_AVX=1"
 export CXXFLAGS="%{optflags}"
 export LDFLAGS="%{?build_ldflags}"
 %make_install prefix=%{_prefix} libdir=%{_libdir}

++++++ _scmsync.obsinfo ++++++
mtime: 1725462627
commit: 679f82e202407e8aea6eb1514bbeb3f5024ded59fc3a4a33a1607268d40dbfb1
url: https://src.opensuse.org/jengelh/xxhash
revision: master

++++++ inline.patch ++++++
From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
Date: 2024-09-04 17:08:46.573623857 +0200
References: https://github.com/Cyan4973/xxHash/issues/943

Ditch forced inlining, gcc-14 does not like it when combined with -Og.
(gcc-13 was fine.) And I want everyone to be able to use -Og.

In function 'void XXH3_hashLong_internal_loop(xxh_u64*, const xxh_u8*, size_t, 
const xxh_u8*, size_t, XXH3_f_accumulate, XXH3_f_scrambleAcc)',
    inlined from 'XXH_NAMESPACEXXH128_hash_t XXH3_hashLong_128b_internal(const 
void*, size_t, const xxh_u8*, size_t, XXH3_f_accumulate, XXH3_f_scrambleAcc)' 
at /usr/include/xxhash.h:6416:32,
    inlined from 'XXH_NAMESPACEXXH128_hash_t XXH3_hashLong_128b_default(const 
void*, size_t, XXH64_hash_t, const void*, size_t)' at 
/usr/include/xxhash.h:6442:39:
/usr/include/xxhash.h:5364:18: error: inlining failed in call to 
'always_inline' 'void XXH3_accumulate_scalar(xxh_u64*, const xxh_u8*, const 
xxh_u8*, size_t)': function not considered for inlining
 5364 | XXH_FORCE_INLINE XXH3_ACCUMULATE_TEMPLATE(scalar)
/usr/include/xxhash.h:5544:14: note: called from here
 5544 |         f_acc(acc, input + n*block_len, secret, nbStripesPerBlock);

---
 xxhash.h |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Index: xxHash-0.8.2/xxhash.h
===================================================================
--- xxHash-0.8.2.orig/xxhash.h
+++ xxHash-0.8.2/xxhash.h
@@ -2107,7 +2107,7 @@ static void* XXH_memcpy(void* dest, cons
 #  define XXH_NO_INLINE static
 /* enable inlining hints */
 #elif defined(__GNUC__) || defined(__clang__)
-#  define XXH_FORCE_INLINE static __inline__ __attribute__((always_inline, 
unused))
+#  define XXH_FORCE_INLINE static __inline__ __attribute__((unused))
 #  define XXH_NO_INLINE static __attribute__((noinline))
 #elif defined(_MSC_VER)  /* Visual Studio */
 #  define XXH_FORCE_INLINE static __forceinline

Reply via email to