On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:38 AM, Chris Tyler <chris@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 21:27 -0400, Adam Goode wrote: >> On 10/25/2010 07:31 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >> > Id like to have00079ca0-0130hat we need to do to support both software floating >> > point and hardware floating point support. >> > I had been under the impression that all we would need to do is to build glibc >> > with hardfp support. however that may not be the case. and we may need to >> > build everything with hardfp support. >> > >> > this is just to get discussion rolling >> > >> >> See this thread for a little context: >> http://cygwin.com/ml/libc-ports/2009-04/msg00020.html >> >> Basically, soft floating point on ARM is done with helper functions. By >> default, these are statically linked in, but they do not need to be. If >> you dynamically link in the aeabi floating point helper code (basically >> libgcc) and have a multilib glibc, then there is the ability to have >> softfp binaries that can take advantage of hardfp when available. These >> binaries will be slower than real hardfp binaries though. And it is not >> clear that multilib alone is sufficient, it may be that the new IFUNC >> stuff is really needed for good performance across different VFP variants. >> >> >> Adam > > Of the devices I've seen so far, the armv5 devices have all been softfp, > and the armv7 devices have been hardfp. Are there any widely-used > exceptions to this pattern? There's discussions on the MeeGo dev list at the moment about moving to it for all supported platforms at the moment. Peter _______________________________________________ arm mailing list arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
