david.rusling at linaro.org
Thu Sep 2 18:40:27 BST 2010
Agree, whilst v7A is our priority, we need to 'do the right thing' for everyone
Sent from my iPhone
On 2 Sep 2010, at 18:17, Jon Smirl <jonsmirl at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de> wrote:
>> On Wednesday 01 September 2010, Michael Hope wrote:
>>> We will try to do no harm to other architectures or earlier ARM
>>> versions. The Thumb-2 routines may be applicable to the Cortex-M and
>>> Cortex-R series but we will not optimise for them.
>>> I'd like Linaro to state this explicitly in the next round.
>>> https://wiki.linaro.org/Linaro1011/TechnicalRequirements defines a
>>> 'Standard ARMv7 Configuration' but there's no higher level statement
>>> justifying it, no statement restricting us to it, and it includes ARM,
>>> Thumb-2, and Thumb-1.
>> I think there are two aspects to this:
>> On the one hand, we need to improve the code formost for new CPUs looking
>> forward, so the latest generation of shiny high-end hardware is what
>> matters the most and needs to be the primary target. Today's high end
>> is tomorrow's mainstream, so sooner or later everyone will benefit from
>> On the other hand, I think we need to be relevant and provide code that
>> everyone can use. The market today mainly consists of stuff that's not
>> the primary focus, like ARM926 or some non-MMU cores. Refusing to do a
>> simple fix because it's not relevant for Cortex-A8/A9 will just manage
>> to piss off people .
>> Obviously there has to be a middle ground. We're building the binary
>> packages for the configuration Dave mentioned (v7A/Neon), but IMHO
>> that shouldn't prevent anyone from rebuilding it with our tool chain
>> without having to make significant changes. If there are patches readily
>> available for stuff that's not our primary focus (thumb1, non-cortex v7A
>> CPUs, vfp without neon, ...), I'd say we should still keep them or
>> get them upstream.
> As an embedded developer I'd like to see a standardized tool chain for
> building on most ARM architectures. There are at least two groups of
> users for this tool chain - ARM based PCs and embedded systems. There
> are dozens are various tool chain build systems for ARM. Every time I
> get a new embedded dev board I have to build yet another ARM tool
> chain to match what the accompanying software expects. This is a
> significant hurdle to new developers who may not have fast machines.
> Some of the people I've worked with needed 24hrs to build a tool
> chain. Let's get a standardized tool chain for the older ARM chips
> into a distribution to stop this needless proliferation.
>>  http://www.joe-ks.com/archives_oct2006/ItsNotMyJob.htm
>> linaro-dev mailing list
>> linaro-dev at lists.linaro.org
> Jon Smirl
> jonsmirl at gmail.com
More information about the Linaro-dev