@mlschroe aarch64 and armv8 are the same CPU, but (obviously, given one is
32bit and one is 64bit) a different ABI -- no need to carry over the legacy
float ABI.
For neon, all aarch64 CPUs made so far have it, and it is part of the aarch64
core - however, ARM's docs say "Both floating-point and NEON are required in
all standard ARMv8 implementations. However, implementations targeting
specialized markets may support the following combinations:
No NEON [...]"
Neither gcc nor clang support aarch64 ABI without NEON for now, so targeting
such a CPU is hypothetical anyway.
So far, the only specialized implementations were 32-bit anyway, but we can't
rule out a special purpose aarch64 CPU without neon coming out at some point.
Given those (if they ever appear) will be rare and non-standard, if they're
worth supporting at all they should probably get a modifier instead of
discouraging people targeting aarch64 from using neon.
For crypto, a modifier may well be useful, aarch64 CPUs exist both with and
without the crypto extensions.
Do we want to go there even though we don't have something comparable in the
x86_64 world where it may make sense to have modifiers for SSE4, AVX, AVX2,
SSE4a, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, .....?
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/425#issuecomment-378906558
_______________________________________________
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
