[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #45 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2021-eac30f8da6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #44 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2021-334f95447d has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #43 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2021-eac30f8da6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-eac30f8da6 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #42 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2021-334f95447d has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-334f95447d See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #41 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2021-1c7e291c32 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-1c7e291c32 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #40 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2021-ce450116fd has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-ce450116fd See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #39 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-c78a938531 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2021-06-01 01:03:39 --- Comment #38 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-5c7f1612ac has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #37 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2021-450e400eba has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-450e400eba See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #36 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-5c7f1612ac has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-5c7f1612ac` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-5c7f1612ac See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #35 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2021-153a84b92a has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-153a84b92a See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #34 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-c78a938531 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-c78a938531` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-c78a938531 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #33 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-ef700ec6c4 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-ef700ec6c4 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-ef700ec6c4 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #32 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2021-fb5cae13e6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-fb5cae13e6 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #31 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-62ef6cf16e has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-62ef6cf16e \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-62ef6cf16e See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #30 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2021-acd6b0882a has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-acd6b0882a See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #29 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2021-fb5cae13e6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-fb5cae13e6 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #28 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2021-acd6b0882a has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-acd6b0882a -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #27 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-ef700ec6c4 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-ef700ec6c4 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-62ef6cf16e has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-62ef6cf16e -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #25 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/highway -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST Flags|needinfo?(zebo...@gmail.com | |) | --- Comment #24 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 --- Thanks, I'm just really busy these days. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 Ben Beasley changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(zebo...@gmail.com ||) --- Comment #23 from Ben Beasley --- (This is just a ping in case you missed the ”package approved“ notifications). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 Ben Beasley changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #22 from Ben Beasley --- Indeed. There were a lot of versions floating around. This one looks good. I would suggest removing “-DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS="%build_cxxflags -DHWY_COMPILE_ALL_ATTAINABLE"”, since: - Compiling worse-than-the-best-guaranteed-available implementations doesn’t do anything useful except allow the upstream developers to test more exhaustively. Specifically, it doesn’t affect the runtime requirements for the tests, which was the goal in adding it. - This does nothing at all on x86_64, according to my study in previous comments. - This might be bloating the installed library with unused implementations on other architectures. Package approved. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980
Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(zebo...@gmail.com |
|) |
--- Comment #21 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 ---
If you check the latest SPEC I posted above, I had already fixed tihs:
https://eclipseo.fedorapeople.org/for-review/highway.spec
%packagedevel
Summary:Development files for Highway
Provides: highway-static = %{version}-%{release}
%description devel
%{common_description}
Development files for Highway.
[…]
%files devel
%license LICENSE
%{_includedir}/hwy/
%{_libdir}/libhwy.a
%{_libdir}/pkgconfig/libhwy.pc
%{_libdir}/pkgconfig/libhwy-test.pc
Thanks for the review.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980
Ben Beasley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(zebo...@gmail.com
||)
--- Comment #20 from Ben Beasley ---
I found only one issue, regarding the placement of the static library.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
Issues:
===
- Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: highway-doc : /usr/share/doc/highway-doc/examples/skeleton-inl.h
highway-doc : /usr/share/doc/highway-doc/examples/skeleton.h highway-doc
: /usr/share/doc/highway-doc/examples/skeleton_shared.h
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/#_devel_packages
This is a false positive, as these are part of an example project. No change
required.
- Static libraries in -static or -devel subpackage, providing -devel if
present.
Note: Package has .a files: highway-libs. Illegal package name: highway-
libs.
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/#packaging-static-libraries
From the guidelines:
> When a package only provides static libraries you MAY place all the
> static library files in the *-devel subpackage. When doing this you also
> MUST have a virtual Provide for the *-static package
You have correctly added the virtual Provide, but it seems the guidelines
require you to put the static library and virtual Provide in the -devel
subpackage and drop the now-empty -libs subpackage.
- After the package is approved, you will need to file Bugzilla bugs blocking
the tracker bugs for unsupported primary architectures, per
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_architecture_build_failures.
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
Note: Using prebuilt packages
Builds in Koji.
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Apache License 2.0", "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright*
Apache License 2.0". 16 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/reviewer/review-highway/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[-]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
ExclusiveArch present and correctly justified. File Bugzilla bugs blocking
tracker bugs for unsupported primary architectures after the package is
approved
(https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_architecture_build_failures).
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
(except as otherwise noted)
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{b
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #19 from Ben Beasley --- Created attachment 1774091 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1774091&action=edit Spec file as reviewed -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #18 from Ben Beasley --- Created attachment 1774089 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1774089&action=edit Spec file as reviewed -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 Ben Beasley changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #17 from Ben Beasley --- Thanks, I didn’t know about the --prebuilt flag. Reviewing now. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(zebo...@gmail.com | |) | --- Comment #16 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 --- (In reply to Ben Beasley from comment #15) > > If you post the spec and SRPM as you want them reviewed, I am prepared to do > the review by: > > 1. Running fedora-review on a copy where I have disabled building the > tests. > 2. Doing a Koji scratch-build with your unmodified submission, then doing > rpmlint and some manual queries on the resulting RPMs. > > I won’t ask for a workaround for the build-time RDTSCP requirement, as the > one I posted above has disadvantages and, considering which particular > instruction is the issue, it’s unlikely to be a problem on Koji or on any > but a very select few workstations. > > I expect I will be able to approve this without any further quibbles. Thanks a lot for the debugging. Could you use the RPMS with https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=65535443 Paste them in the same directory as the SPEC and SRPM then launch fedora-review with the -p option: fedora-review --mock-config fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -n highway -p (-p, --prebuiltWhen using -n , use prebuilt rpms in current directory.) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980
Ben Beasley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|c...@musicinmybrain.net
Flags||needinfo?(zebo...@gmail.com
||)
--- Comment #15 from Ben Beasley ---
Looks like it’s the benchmarking/timer code, which gets called even with
--gtest_list_tests:
> [reviewer@musicbox x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu]$ valgrind ./tests/hwy_test
> --gtest_list_tests
> ==147381== Memcheck, a memory error detector
> ==147381== Copyright (C) 2002-2017, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al.
> ==147381== Using Valgrind-3.16.1 and LibVEX; rerun with -h for copyright info
> ==147381== Command: ./tests/hwy_test --gtest_list_tests
> ==147381==
> vex amd64->IR: unhandled instruction bytes: 0xF 0x1 0xF9 0xF 0xAE 0xE8 0x29
> 0xF8 0x48 0x83
> vex amd64->IR: REX=0 REX.W=0 REX.R=0 REX.X=0 REX.B=0
> vex amd64->IR: VEX=0 VEX.L=0 VEX.n=0x0 ESC=0F
> vex amd64->IR: PFX.66=0 PFX.F2=0 PFX.F3=0
> ==147381== valgrind: Unrecognised instruction at address 0x10eb5a.
> ==147381==at 0x10EB5A: Stop32 (nanobenchmark.cc:310)
> ==147381==by 0x10EB5A: hwy::(anonymous namespace)::TimerResolution()
> (nanobenchmark.cc:457)
> ==147381==by 0x10EBEC: __static_initialization_and_destruction_0
> (nanobenchmark.cc:465)
> ==147381==by 0x10EBEC: _GLOBAL__sub_I_nanobenchmark.cc
> (nanobenchmark.cc:721)
> ==147381==by 0x1865BC: __libc_csu_init (in
> /home/reviewer/rpmbuild/BUILD/highway-0.11.1/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/tests/hwy_test)
> ==147381==by 0x4C6616D: (below main) (in /usr/lib64/libc-2.32.so)
> ==147381== Your program just tried to execute an instruction that Valgrind
> ==147381== did not recognise. There are two possible reasons for this.
> ==147381== 1. Your program has a bug and erroneously jumped to a non-code
> ==147381==location. If you are running Memcheck and you just saw a
> ==147381==warning about a bad jump, it's probably your program's fault.
> ==147381== 2. The instruction is legitimate but Valgrind doesn't handle it,
> ==147381==i.e. it's Valgrind's fault. If you think this is the case or
> ==147381==you are not sure, please let us know and we'll try to fix it.
> ==147381== Either way, Valgrind will now raise a SIGILL signal which will
> ==147381== probably kill your program.
> ==147381==
> ==147381== Process terminating with default action of signal 4 (SIGILL):
> dumping core
> ==147381== Illegal opcode at address 0x10EB5A
> ==147381==at 0x10EB5A: Stop32 (nanobenchmark.cc:310)
> ==147381==by 0x10EB5A: hwy::(anonymous namespace)::TimerResolution()
> (nanobenchmark.cc:457)
> ==147381==by 0x10EBEC: __static_initialization_and_destruction_0
> (nanobenchmark.cc:465)
> ==147381==by 0x10EBEC: _GLOBAL__sub_I_nanobenchmark.cc
> (nanobenchmark.cc:721)
> ==147381==by 0x1865BC: __libc_csu_init (in
> /home/reviewer/rpmbuild/BUILD/highway-0.11.1/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/tests/hwy_test)
> ==147381==by 0x4C6616D: (below main) (in /usr/lib64/libc-2.32.so)
> ==147381==
> ==147381== HEAP SUMMARY:
> […]
So it’s actually the RDTSCP instruction that’s the issue here, not any of the
SIMD in the library.
I don’t love adjusting the build settings based on the build host, but this is
a %build section that works on my machine:
> %ifarch x86_64 %{ix86}
> # Even listing tests invokes the “nanobenchmark” code; on x86, this uses
> # RDTSCP, which may not be available, and the build process runs the test
> # executables to list the tests. We must therefore skip building the tests on
> # hosts without RDTSCP.”
> if ! grep -E '\brdtscp\b' /proc/cpuinfo >/dev/null
> then
> build_testing='OFF'
> fi
> %endif
> %cmake -DHWY_SYSTEM_GTEST:BOOL=ON -DBUILD_TESTING:BOOL="${build_testing-ON}"
> %cmake_build
On the other hand, while it is difficult to find documentation on exactly which
CPU models have supported RDTSCP, I think 64-bit CPUs without it are rather
rare. This is mine:
https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/29765/intel-core-2-quad-processor-q6600-8m-cache-2-40-ghz-1066-mhz-fsb.html.
So it really may not be worth working around this case.
-
If you post the spec and SRPM as you want them reviewed, I am prepared to do
the review by:
1. Running fedora-review on a copy where I have disabled building the tests.
2. Doing a Koji scratch-build with your unmodified submission, then doing
rpmlint and some manual queries on the resulting RPMs.
I won’t ask for a workaround for the build-time RDTSCP requirement, as the one
I posted above has disadvantages and, considering which particular instruction
is the issue, it’s unlikely to be a problem on Koji or on any but a very select
few workstations.
I expect I will be able to approve this without any further quibbles.
--
You are receiving th
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #14 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 --- Okay, thanks a lot for your time! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #13 from Ben Beasley --- It doesn’t make much sense. The code that sets up the test suites, at the bottom of hwy/tests/hwy_test.cc, is outside the HWY_BEFORE_NAMESPACE(); / HWY_AFTER_NAMESPACE();, and is guarded by #if HWY_ONCE / #endif, so it really should be compiled only for the static target (scalar in this case) based on my reading of hwy/foreach_target.h. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980
Ben Beasley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(code@musicinmybra |
|in.net) |
--- Comment #12 from Ben Beasley ---
I’ve never seen this before: fedora-review spends a while building, then spits
this out:
> WARNING: Package highway-devel-0.11.1-1.fc35 not built
> WARNING: Package highway-doc-0.11.1-1.fc35 not built
> ERROR: 'No srpm found for highway' (logs in
> /home/reviewer/.cache/fedora-review.log)
Eventually I figured out that this was just a consequence of the SRPM in your
last comment not matching the spec file.
Once I got the correct SRPM from the Koji scratch-build, I got a similar error
to before, although it was later in the build this time:
> [ 92%] Built target arithmetic_test
> [ 95%] Linking CXX executable tests/hwy_test
> /usr/bin/cmake -E cmake_link_script CMakeFiles/hwy_test.dir/link.txt
> --verbose=1
> /usr/bin/g++ -O2 -flto=auto -ffat-lto-objects -fexceptions -g
> -grecord-gcc-switches -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security
> -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS
> -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1 -fstack-protector-strong
> -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1 -m64 -mtune=generic
> -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection -fcf-protection -O2 -g
> -DNDEBUG -Wl,-z,relro -Wl,--as-needed -Wl,-z,now
> -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-ld -fPIE -pie
> CMakeFiles/hwy_test.dir/hwy/tests/hwy_test.cc.o -o tests/hwy_test libhwy.a
> /usr/lib64/libgtest.so /usr/lib64/libgtest_main.so /usr/lib64/libgtest.so
> -lpthread
> /usr/bin/cmake -D TEST_TARGET=hwy_test -D
> TEST_EXECUTABLE=/builddir/build/BUILD/highway-0.11.1/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/tests/hwy_test
> -D TEST_EXECUTOR= -D
> TEST_WORKING_DIR=/builddir/build/BUILD/highway-0.11.1/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu
> -D TEST_EXTRA_ARGS= -D TEST_PROPERTIES= -D TEST_PREFIX= -D TEST_SUFFIX= -D
> NO_PRETTY_TYPES=FALSE -D NO_PRETTY_VALUES=FALSE -D TEST_LIST=hwy_test_TESTS
> -D
> CTEST_FILE=/builddir/build/BUILD/highway-0.11.1/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/hwy_test[1]_tests.cmake
> -D TEST_DISCOVERY_TIMEOUT=60 -D TEST_XML_OUTPUT_DIR= -P
> /usr/share/cmake/Modules/GoogleTestAddTests.cmake
> CMake Error at /usr/share/cmake/Modules/GoogleTestAddTests.cmake:77 (message):
> Error running test executable.
> Path:
> '/builddir/build/BUILD/highway-0.11.1/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/tests/hwy_test'
> Result: Illegal instruction
> Output:
>
> Call Stack (most recent call first):
> /usr/share/cmake/Modules/GoogleTestAddTests.cmake:173
> (gtest_discover_tests_impl)
> gmake[2]: Leaving directory
> '/builddir/build/BUILD/highway-0.11.1/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu'
> gmake[2]: *** [CMakeFiles/hwy_test.dir/build.make:111: tests/hwy_test] Error 1
> gmake[2]: *** Deleting file 'tests/hwy_test'
> gmake[1]: *** [CMakeFiles/Makefile2:239: CMakeFiles/hwy_test.dir/all] Error 2
> gmake[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs
It looks like this is the offending section in GoogleTestAddTests.cmake:
> # Run test executable to get list of available tests
> if(NOT EXISTS "${_TEST_EXECUTABLE}")
> message(FATAL_ERROR
> "Specified test executable does not exist.\n"
> " Path: '${_TEST_EXECUTABLE}'"
> )
> endif()
> execute_process(
> COMMAND ${_TEST_EXECUTOR} "${_TEST_EXECUTABLE}" --gtest_list_tests
> WORKING_DIRECTORY "${_TEST_WORKING_DIR}"
> TIMEOUT ${_TEST_DISCOVERY_TIMEOUT}
> OUTPUT_VARIABLE output
> RESULT_VARIABLE result
> )
> if(NOT ${result} EQUAL 0)
> string(REPLACE "\n" "\n" output "${output}")
> message(FATAL_ERROR
> "Error running test executable.\n"
> " Path: '${_TEST_EXECUTABLE}'\n"
> " Result: ${result}\n"
> " Output:\n"
> "${output}\n"
> )
> endif()
So the test executables are getting run with --gtest_list_tests to discover the
tests they implement, and the code that sets up the test suites has been
compiled such that even this requires–well, here I haven’t waded through all of
the macro soup, but something I don’t have, anyway. I think if it required all
supported ISA extensions to run it would not be working on Koji.
Note that the baseline target is scalar:
> ./hwy_list_targets || ( exit 0 )
> Compiled HWY_TARGETS: AVX3 AVX2 SSE4 Scalar
> HWY_BASELINE_TARGETS: Scalar
…but that this was also the case in your older Koji scratch build,
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=65535443.
So I’m pretty sure that adding -DHWY_COMPILE_ALL_ATTAINABLE is not doing
anything at all here on x86_64, since scalar is the only baseline target. (This
makes sense as baseline targets are supposed to be only those enabled in the
compilation environment, and you are not adding anything beyond the default
Fedora flags.) is causing it to additionally compile targets
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(code@musicinmybra ||in.net) --- Comment #11 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 --- Spec URL: https://eclipseo.fedorapeople.org/for-review/highway.spec SRPM URL: https://eclipseo.fedorapeople.org/for-review/highway-0-0.1.20201212git8205c2c.fc34.src.rpm Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=65535439 Hi, Could you take a look again with your old machine? I added -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS="%build_cxxflags -DHWY_COMPILE_ALL_ATTAINABLE" which should enable HWY_SCALAR for non-SIMD. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #10 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 --- Ok, thanks for taking a look! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #9 from Ben Beasley --- So, if I may paraphrase, your argument is that a package can require extensions to the architectural baseline in order to build, as long as the Koji builders have these extensions in practice. (It’s established that library packages—but not applications—can require such extensions at runtime, https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1044.) That might be a reasonable claim, actually. I’d rather see a package that builds everywhere, but I’m willing to go with it. I commented out the %ctest, but the hwy_test executable gets started anyway partway through the build and explodes as in my previous comment, so I’m going to have to skip reviewing this one. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #8 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 --- The minimum supported instruction set is SSE4. Since it's providing SIMD instructions and it builds on Koji, it doesn't make sense to test if it's lower than SSE4. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 Ben Beasley changed: What|Removed |Added CC||c...@musicinmybrain.net --- Comment #7 from Ben Beasley --- Because my workstation is an antique, this fails to build in mock for me. > /usr/bin/cmake -D TEST_TARGET=hwy_test -D > TEST_EXECUTABLE=/builddir/build/BUILD/highway-0.11.1/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/tests/hwy_test > -D TEST_EXECUTOR= -D > TEST_WORKING_DIR=/builddir/build/BUILD/highway-0.11.1/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu > -D TEST_EXTRA_ARGS= -D TEST_PROPERTIES= -D TEST_PREFIX= -D TEST_SUFFIX= -D > NO_PRETTY_TYPES=FALSE -D NO_PRETTY_VALUES=FALSE -D TEST_LIST=hwy_test_TESTS > -D > CTEST_FILE=/builddir/build/BUILD/highway-0.11.1/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/hwy_test[1]_tests.cmake > -D TEST_DISCOVERY_TIMEOUT=60 -D TEST_XML_OUTPUT_DIR= -P > /usr/share/cmake/Modules/GoogleTestAddTests.cmake > CMake Error at /usr/share/cmake/Modules/GoogleTestAddTests.cmake:77 (message): > Error running test executable. > Path: > '/builddir/build/BUILD/highway-0.11.1/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/tests/hwy_test' > Result: Illegal instruction > Output: > > Call Stack (most recent call first): > /usr/share/cmake/Modules/GoogleTestAddTests.cmake:173 > (gtest_discover_tests_impl) You will need to make sure that tests using SIMD extensions that are not in the baseline for the architecture are not executed. SSE2 is inherently part of x86_64, and we can assume it in Fedora for i686 (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Update_i686_architectural_baseline_to_include_SSE2). Everything later needs to be checked by grepping /proc/cpuinfo, using the CLI tool from https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/google-cpu_features, or something similar. - It’s probably worth justifying shipping static libraries in a spec file comment. In this case it looks like there is simply no upstream support for building as a shared library. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
