Jon Masters wrote: > On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 21:10 +0000, Matthew Wilson wrote: > >> 2. Armv7 / VFP / NEON support to squeeze a bit more performance out >> (where appropriate to the h/w). > > FWIW, I think (eventually), moving to an ARMv7 base has a lot of > benefit, with not a (lot) of drawback. After all, Fedora ARM is new > enough that there isn't a lot of legacy out there (there will always be > old ARM boards people want to use, certainly), and all of the boards now > being produced are based on Cortex (or similar) designs with v7. There > are one or two notable exceptions, but it's obvious where things are > headed. It's really just a question of /when/ to switch IMHO. I think you are overestimating the proliveration of ARMv7. There are a lot of capable ARMv5 devices out there, such as the SheevaPlug/GuruPlug. Is the plan to offer both v5 and v7 builds (same way as there is an x86 and x86-64 build)? Or v7 only? >> It's probably worth gathering some data on h/w and experiences as the >> beta progresses. Any objections to my creating a wiki page to track >> and summarise this? > > That sounds like a great idea! I'm running Fedora ARM on a bunch of > BeagleBoards, and some PandaBoards at the moment. I have a DreamPlug on > the way, and a SheevaPlug that may get re-used, but hopefully not before > I've convinced myself that ARMv7 is a good base ;) IMO committing to ARMv7 to the point of exclusion of everything else would be a bad idea at the moment. The primary motivation for the v7 switch is performance, and there are still a number of ARMv5 and ARMv6 devices out there that are more than adequate on the ARM performance scale. Gordan _______________________________________________ arm mailing list arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
