[MPlayer-dev-eng] [PATCH] two independent patches for configure

[Xidorn Quan]

On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 5:28 AM, Alexander Strasser <eclipse7 at gmx.net>wrote:

> Xidorn Quan wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 6:29 PM, Alexander Strasser <eclipse7 at gmx.net
> >wrote:
> > > Xidorn Quan wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 10:54 PM, Xidorn Quan <quanxunzhen at gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > Two independent patches for configure are attached.
> > > > >
> > > > > The first patch adds more cpu type detection. It can now recongize
> > > > > atom, corei7, and corei7-avx. References:
> > > > > http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/Safe_Cflags/Intel
> > > > > http://software.intel.com/en-us/comment/1137881
> > > > > http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~charngda/x86cpu.html
> > > > >
> > > > > The second patch moves some code which dependent on information of
> cc
> > > > > down so that it can work properly.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Ping. These two patches are simple.
> > > >
> > > > The first patch can improve performance of mplayer when compiled by
> > > > compilers doesn't support cpu type autodetecting, like clang, and
> > > > runtime cpu detection is disabled. I have given the references for
> > > > such detections.
> > > >
> > > > The second patch removes unused flags for clang to silent some
> > > > compiling warning.
> > >
> > >   I apologize for my slowness. Please be a bit more patient. I
> > > will look into your patches - as my rather little time permits.
> > >
> > >   Currently I am looking at your other patch.
> >
> >
> > Well, there have been about 10 days since you applied my other patch.
> > Do you now have time to look into these patches? The patches has been
> > here for more than 2 weeks.
>
>   In absence of any further comments on these patches:
>
>   I am in favor of your 2nd patch which moves the extra_cflags
> modification after compiler detection. I plan to commit it in
> one to two days.
>
>   I still have a few questions though: Is clang invoked via cc
> program name on your installation? Could you test if it still
> works as intended with gcc on darwin?
>

For the first question, yes. Presently, cc is linked to clang in OS X
by default.

For the second, well, gcc seems to fail to compile mplayer in my
system, but this shouldn't be related to this patch since it threw
the same errors with the original configure.


>   On the first patch. I am not against it and it mostly looks
> fine. I still need to check the facts though. On the critique
> of wm4, I do not think it makes sense to reject this patch
> particularly. I also don't buy the packaging argument and still
> if I am wrong the setting-of-compiler-switches-for-arch-dependant-
> optimization-feature needs to be ripped off all together.
>
>   Comments welcome...
>

Thanks for taking care.

Regards,
Xidorn Quan