> James Almer Wrote: > >> > >> Yes, but we don't want to use AVX512 on hardware that downclocks > heavily. > >> > > > > It's okay. Should I updated the configure file to let the IceLake-AVX512 to > be the minimum baseline or add a new macro name AVX512ICL? > > Update the test in configure to look for an instruction available on Ice Lake > (like VL), then update the check in cpu.c to make sure AVX2 is only enabled if > AVX2-related flags Ice Lake and newer CPUs have in common are signaled. >
Hi there, For this patchset, I receive two suggestions from you. one is about to make avx512 codes only run for icelake and newer architectures. So I submit a patchset for icelake-avx512 minimums baseline. Please check this link for more details: http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2021-August/283973.html The second is about giving the choice to users and developers. Check this link for more details: http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2021-August/283984.html Because this patchset was developed based on the configurations of AVX512 that FFmpeg already offered, It was totally independent and compatible whatever the baseline of avx512 is, skylake-avx512, icelake-avx512, or newer architectures. So whatever add a new avx512 flag for icelake or not, it would not affect the functionality of this patchset. Could you help review the chat history and send me the modification plan? I am glad to update and improve with whatever I am able to do. Best regards. Jianhua _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
