On Sat, 2016-03-12 at 09:02 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 8:57 AM, Khem Raj <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 7:41 PM, Otavio Salvador > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 9:17 PM, Khem Raj <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mar 12, 2016, at 12:58 AM, Daniel Dragomir < > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > This patch adds tunes for 32-bit armv8a platforms. The user > > > > > can select > > > > > little or big endian, hard or soft float, the vector floating > > > > > -point > > > > > instruction set: vfpv4 or fp-armv8 and the thumb, neon, crc > > > > > and crypto > > > > > extensions. > > > > > > > > This does not feel right to me. Look at how thunderX looks like > > > > ARMv8 is the time to fix this tune explodes on arm, this patch > > > > is not helping > > > > it. > > > > > > > > Do we need the hf/neon/vfp/thumb2 variants? > > > > > > Do you mean we ought to use hf+neon+thumb2+fp-armv8 for everyone > > > and > > > just have optional features in and out? > > > > something like that yes. Just aarch64 and aarch32 make it simple as > > that > > ARMv8.1a has different semantics, how does we handle this?
I do think Khem has a point here, there are way too many tunes in this class and I've very much doubt they all make sense, there are likely only a handful of key ones and it would be ideal just to filter the class down to those. The trouble I face is I don't really know all the details of armv8 so I'm reliant on others with more knowledge of which ones make sense to make the call... Cheers, Richard -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
