On Tue, 2016-03-29 at 18:59 +0300, Dragomir Daniel wrote: > > arch-arm8a.inc add now support for armv8-A processors which support 2 > states: > 32-bit and 64-bit states. It makes more sense to have support for > both states > in the same inc file because both refer to the same arch.
OK. And I assume you feel this is a greater benefit than having the 32-bit ARMv8 bits in a single file that could be shared by ARMv8-R and ARMv8-M, right? > So, you say that we should not use aarch32 and aarch64 for armv8a, > but to use something like armv8a64 and armv8a32? That would be my preference, but of course it's not my decision to make. p. -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
