On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 22:59 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > here I guess we have to say AVAILTUNES += "arm920t arm920" > where arm920 is arm mode and 920t is thumb mode. but anyway I would > prefer that thumb is optionally added provided user asked for it > through DISTRO/MACHINE features then we should first make sure > that selected machine has thumb feature and if yes for both then we > should enable -mthumb compiler option which now it enable when thumb > appears in TUNE_FEATURES
I don't think we want to go down the road of inventing CPU names for ARM-state variants of Thumb-capable cores. (In other words, we shouldn't start putting things like "arm920" in AVAILTUNES when there isn't actually a core named arm920.) Fundamentally I think you're right that the choice between ARM-state and Thumb-state (for t1 at least) ought to be under the control of the DISTRO and not selected purely on the basis of the hardware capabilities. For t2 it is a bit less of a clear-cut issue but, if there are genuinely people making ARMv7 cores with the Thumb decoder removed, I guess we need to have that same switch there as well. p. _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
