[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: allowed uses of non-baseline CPU extensions

On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 06:53:49PM +0800, Aron Xu wrote:
> With packages like sse2-support maintainers have the option of
> creating different flavors of their packages with modern instructions
> enabled/disabled,

The opposite is true.

The result are not different flavors (which would be OK),
the result is one package that does not support the baseline.

If what you have in mind is a foo-avx package in addition to
a foo package, then that's not the problematic case (the only
technical question would be whether foo-avx should be in a
separate package or in the foo package).

> this gives great possibility to some very common use
> cases, for instance "avx-support" on amd64, which is critical to most
> scientific software to run at appropriate performance. In this case we
> can avoid a painful tradeoff between keeping and raising the baseline
> which has zero flexibility.

There is no such tradeoff, the only thing we avoid is either upstream or 
the maintainer supporting both.

The proper upstream solution are several versions of the performance 
critical part with runtime selection.

If a maintainer wants to provide different flavors, I remember seeing 
some package (in Debian Med?) taking the approach of compiling the whole 
program twice with a tiny wrapper program that does runtime detection 
and then calls the actual program.

And if things should *really* be optimimized for maximum performance,
you'd end up with a -src package that compiles the software with
no hardening and -march=native.

> Users of really old or rare hardware should be able to handle their
> own case - by recompiling critical packages themselves,

Debian is a binary distribution, it is not for the individual maintainer 
to decide how many users to screw by not supporting their hardware.

And if the package can just be recompiled to support the baseline,
this is somehting the maintainer is supposed to be able to handle
(see above).

> by producing something like raspbian,

The raspian baseline has never been supported by the Debian armhf port.

non-AVX on amd64 and non-NEON on armhf are fully supported by Debian.

> or at least by staying on an old release if
> they need something can't be supported at all (i.e. upstream removed
> compatibility in current release).

How many packages can you name that do support non-SSE2 in a previous 
Debian stable but cannot be made to compile without SSE2-support now?

> Regards,
> Aron



       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

Reply to: