On Wed, 2011-07-27 at 09:58 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: > For the tune names.. armv5 means I want classic ARM instructions, while > armv5t > means I was thumb instructions. > > So armv5 and armv5t are distinct in the contents of the tunings.
Ah, I see. Does that go for v4t too? I can imagine cases where you would want to say "select the v4T ISA but generate ARM code not Thumb". > Yes, the mention of DSP should be using the 'e'. What I'm not sure of is does > the "dsp" capabilities actually change any of the code or support generated. > If > not then we can ignore it. Yes. PLD, for example, is only available in ARMv5E (not ARMv5) and this will affect any code which uses __builtin_prefetch(). I don't think GCC will ever open-code the saturating arithmetic instructions, but it does expose the v5/v5e distinction through preprocessor macros and source code might use that to select asm() statements which use those opcodes. > For armv5 this gives us: > > armv5, armv5t, armv5e, armv5te... add in their VFP variants and the hard float > EABI... Does anybody really want the hardfloat abi on armv5? I guess it doesn't hurt all that much to offer it, but anything that makes that monstrous set of .inc files bigger seems like a bad thing. p. _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
