On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 4:28 PM, <omalleys@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Quoting Gordan Bobic <gordan@xxxxxxxxxx>: > >> Dennis Gilmore wrote: >>>> Hi Jon, >>>> >>>> On Wed, May 04 2011, Jon Masters wrote: >>>>> I'd like to kick off a discussion about flags for ARMv7. My proposal >>>>> here is that we treat v7hl as an entirely different architecture, and >>>>> don't try any multi-arch kind of hacks (there isn't the established user >>>>> base for Fedora ARM to justify doing any of those things at the moment). >>>>> >>>>> Things I think we should consider as a minimum: >>>>> >>>>> *). Little endian (obviously, but worth stating) (l) >>>>> *). Cortex-A8 or higher fully compliant core(s) >>>>> *). ARM VFP3 hardware floating point (h) >>>>> *). ARM NEON Architecture >>>>> *). Thumb2 interworking >>>>> *). Your suggestion here? >>>>> >>>>> I think we should build for ARM (as opposed to Thumb2) but we should >>>>> support interworking with Thumb2 code through the toolchain options. We >>>>> should then later consider implementing some Thumb2 optimization. It's >>>>> more armv7thl, but the (t) is implied since it's ARMv7 anyway. >>>>> >>>>> Several folks have begun looking at toolchain bringup based on the F-15 >>>>> toolchain applied to an F-13 userspace initially. But I'd like us to >>>>> discuss options/requirements for toolchains before we go too far. >>>>> >>>>> Once I get some feedback, I'll be updating the wiki, along with some >>>>> more F-15 goals and (hopefully) generally useful stuff. >>>> Just for the record, this sounds great from OLPC's perspective; +1. >>>> (I expect we'd rather build for Thumb2, even if only for the size >>>> benefit.) >>> >>> ive started building some f15 rpms with hardfp >>> >>> i set in redhat-rpm-config >>> -march=armv7-a -mfpu=vfpv3-d16 -mfloat-abi=hard -mthumb >>> >>> im using meego as a base to bootstrap, we will need to build a couple of >>> times to get everything bootstrapped right with the full set of flags. >>> meego dropped some things like selinux. im slowly making some progress. i >>> want to get to having a fedora minimal buildroot by the end the week. >>> though that might be a bit hard since gcc will take some time to compile. >> >> Does that mean we are skipping F14 alltogether? I'm not against the >> idea, just curious. Anything that helps close the gap to primary distros >> is a good thing. :) > > I don't think armv5 is skipping f14. No definitely not skipping armv5 F-14. I'm working on it but having a few issues. All help and assistance appreciated. > It is probably a good idea to skip F14 for armv7 though and start off > at least in the general ballpark of the mainline distro. The armv7+hardfp would be hard for F-14 as it would need a lot of patches to gcc etc. armv7+soft as we have now probably won't provide massive improvements. Ultimately I think we'll end up with a arm5tel for maximum hardware support as we have now, and then a arm7hl (plus possibly thumb) for best performance on armv7 platforms. > The rpm tweaks need to make it upstream though. :) Correct, and it would be good to get this into there soon assuming the above settings are what we all agree upon for v7 + hardfp for F-15. Peter _______________________________________________ arm mailing list arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
