On 06/05/2011 12:26 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Gordan Bobic<gordan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 06/05/2011 09:54 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: >>> On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 2:10 AM, Chris Tyler<chris@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On Sat, 2011-06-04 at 20:53 -0400, Jon Masters wrote: >>>>> [0] We're making a "one time" incompatible ABI switch in F-15 bringup to >>>>> the "hard float" ABI defined in section 6 of the ARM AAPCS (commonly >>>>> referred to as the ARM EABI - but that doesn't actually exist as a >>>>> name). The procedure call standard will be ARM AAPCS vfpv3-d16, as >>>>> defined in section 6 of that document. Other distros are switching and >>>>> this will form the basis of any LSB standardization effort later on. >>>>> Think of v7 and v5 as being different arches, which they are really. >>>> >>>> And to further clarify: >>>> >>>> - This is an addition, not a switch -- the intention is to continue to >>>> support armv5tel in addition to armv7hl at this time -- Tegra and >>>> Marvell Kirkwood (including plug computer) devices which do not support >>>> armv7hl will continue to work with armv5tel. >>> >>> Err Tegra should be supported due to the use of vfpv3-d16? Correct? >> >> I think Chris wanted to see NEON as standard on armv7. I already voiced >> my disagreement to that in an earlier post. Since NEON packages can be >> used on any hardfp platform that supports NEON, I think NEON enabling >> should be handled on a package-by-package basis. It seems like a sounder >> trade-off for the sake of "rpmbuild --rebuild" with a different .rpmrc file. > > Neon and hardfp are completely mutually exclusive. You can have one > with out the other in both cases (NEON on softfp, no NEON with > hardfp). Hmm... My understanding that NEON SIMD is hardfp only. Gordan _______________________________________________ arm mailing list arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
