Control: tags -1 upstream Control: forwarded -1 https://github.com/xianyi/OpenBLAS/issues/1307
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 12:34:34PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > On 09/14/2017 09:58 AM, Sébastien Villemot wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 08:33:08PM +0000, PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel wrote: > >>> Unfortunately it does not look that simple. OpenBLAS is optimized for > >>> z13, but > >>> our s390x port is supposed to support all the z systems (see [1]). > >> > >> what about asking for a a z13-support package to the isa-support (source > >> package) maintainer. This way it could be possible to upload an optimise > >> vesion of openblas which can install on recent enought s390x machines. > > > > I am not totally convinced by this solution. If we adopt it, somebody who > > installs e.g. octave on an old system-z machine will be hit by a failure in > > the > > dpkg installation process, which needs manual intervention. This is likely > > to > > generate problems in automated installers (and also confuse and annoy system > > admins). > > > >> the question will be then : does the buildd support these instructions ? > > > > I leave that to the s390 porters to answer. > > FWIW, some years ago I did the atlas port for s390x. For dynamic linking the > atlas > build/package process did support the exploitation of ELF HW_CAPS. So you > could > build a z900 (generic) and a z13 variant which is then picked by the linker > at > runtime. No idea if openblas allows the same. Of course the static variant > (.a) > must be the generic one. Thanks for your feedback. I have opened a request upstream about the need for a z900 kernel, and for a dynamic selection between the z900 and z13 kernels (as OpenBLAS currently does on x86). -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature