On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 8:02 PM, Otavio Salvador <otavio.salva...@ossystems.com.br> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 8:57 AM, Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 7:41 PM, Otavio Salvador >> <otavio.salva...@ossystems.com.br> wrote: >>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 9:17 PM, Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Mar 12, 2016, at 12:58 AM, Daniel Dragomir >>>>> <daniel.drago...@windriver.com> 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?
question is do we need to handle this with tunes at all ? what advantages are we looking for. -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
