Thank you for the patch! On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 3:28 AM Shiyou Yin <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: Yin Shiyou <yinshiyou-hf@loongson>
Should be yinshiyou-hf@loongson*.cn*? > > 1. Replace LS_CFLAGS with MMI_CFLAGS to express its intention more accurately. > LS_CFLAGS is still available, but it is not recommended. I'm not aware of any reasons why LS_CFLAGS needs to stay for compatibility. Do we know of any distros that set it to override the -march=... value? > 2. Improve the control logic for enabling MMI. > > Three essential conditions for enabling MMI: > 1) user have not specify --disable-loongson-mmi. > 2) MMI options has been specified by MMI_CFLAGS,CC or compiler's default > setting. > 3) compiler supports these MMI options. > --- > configure.ac | 69 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- We should also update meson.build. I expect/hope that the autotools build system will go away sometime in the future. I'm not sure I entirely understand the patch. I understand that the objective is to make it possible to easily build pixman for Loongson3A and use the pixman-mmx.c optimizations. I think it's currently possible to build pixman on mips without specifying -march=loongson* in CFLAGS and it will enable the pixman-mmx.c paths and choose them at runtime. Is part of the goal to keep that working? If so, could we just use the -mloongson-mmi flag to compile pixman-mmx.c? Or does that flag mean the Loongson3A variants of the instructions? What happens if you compile with -march=loongson2f -mloongson-mmi? Does GCC generate instructions compatible with 2F or 3A? _______________________________________________ Pixman mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pixman
