2011/9/3 Christian Robottom Reis <k...@linaro.org>: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:24:59AM -0500, Zach Pfeffer wrote: >> I'd like you to meet Jim who did the initial hardfloat work. This >> email contains the results that Jim produced. > > Hmm, but the email seems to not actually contain a hard-float run. Or am > I misreading what he means by Fixed vs VFP?
hi kiko, In fact, the presentation was incomplete. That is exactly the reason why I didn't want to make it public. The original plans were as following: - Analyze skia and webkit for soft/hard-fp - Select fixed-point, soft-vfp, and hard-fp implementations in skia and then check the benchmark results. However, I didn't make all benchmark results ready when I built with hard-fp. I didn't know why and stopped the study due to personal reasons. (sorry for being absent) >> I believe that the conclusion was that skia and webkit may benefit, >> but that such benefits would impose an undue burden on Android's >> distribution model which tries to create libs that can run on as many >> architectures as possible. > > You may be confusing things here. Hard-float is a pure software ABI > change, and any platform which supports VFP can use it if you build it > that way. However, since it is an ABI change it requires that hard-float > libraries be available. Yes, since ABI has to be changed, we have to confirm the modifications against existing components: - dalvik fast-interpreter and jitter - v8 compiler/evaluator - android software OpenGL|ES renderer Again, please don't be too serious about my incomplete materials. I didn't have enough time to analyze that time. > What /would/ stop code from running on certain platforms is using > NEON (it would exclude the Tegra2 and some existing Marvell v7s). But > that doesn't seem to be in question here. Regards, -jserv _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
