https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
--- Comment #9 from ahashmi <assad.has...@linaro.org> --- > It's true that if you are v8.2 or better then DC CVAP is present, but this > does not mean the converse (that if DC CVAP is present then you are v8.2). It > is valid for a v8.1 implementation to provide this feature. That makes a difference to my decision. I made an incorrect assumption when reading the spec: - - - snip 0b0000 DC CVAP not supported. 0b0001 DC CVAP supported. 0b0010 DC CVAP and DC CVADP supported. ... In Armv8.2, the permitted values are 0b0001 and 0b0010. >From Armv8.5, the only permitted value is 0b0010 - - - snip "In Armv8.2" != "From Armv8.2" But some features are more tightly bound to a version, e.g. RDM - - - snip 0b0000 No RDMA instructions implemented. 0b0001 SQRDMLAH and SQRDMLSH instructions implemented. All other values are reserved. >From Armv8.1, the only permitted value is 0b0001. - - - snip So, Arm publishes a version specification with a set of mandatory and optional features. An implementer builds h/w which states conformance to a version. The implementer's version conformance statement is fairly meaningless without a list of features which are supported. This answers the question: "why doesn't /proc/cpuinfo give an Arm version?" -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
