From: Phil Blundell <philb@gnu.org>
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: ARM tunings was Re: [PATCH 3/7] conf/machine/include: Cleanup MIPS tunings to match README
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 22:30:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1334007051.3382.19.camel@x121e.pbcl.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F8352CD.7070500@windriver.com>
On Mon, 2012-04-09 at 16:21 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote:
> I do, and thus the hell that is ARM. I could not currently generate a single
> package feed that work would on a variety of devices (like a traditional
> workstaton/server Linux OS would.)
Well, actually, you could in fact do exactly that. What you couldn't
necessarily do with the tunings as they exist right now is generate a
package feed which is optimised for (as opposed to "works on") all those
devices. But it isn't clear to me that you could do that with a
"traditional workstaton/server" kind of distribution either. In the x86
world, for example, the majority of the big distros do not bother to
ship individually-tuned binaries for different processor types,
certainly not for the entire distribution.
>Add in to that one of the tunings -- not indicated by the package arch
>of thumb enabled or not
There are multiple reasons why this isn't indicated by the PACKAGE_ARCH.
Firstly, it's irrelevant: on v5T or newer, the question of whether a
given package is using Thumb-state or not has no ABI impact and there is
no reason for anyone to care at a compatibility level. Second, it may
be unpredictable: the compiler is at liberty (although current versions
of gcc don't exploit this latitude) to switch arbitrarily between
ARM-state and Thumb-state as it sees fit to get the best performance.
And thirdly, it's just another piece of distro policy in the same way as
compiling for -O2 vs -Os (which we also don't encode into PACKAGE_ARCH)
is.
p.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-09 21:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-03 19:47 [PATCH 0/7] Cleanup and document tuning files Mark Hatle
2012-04-03 19:47 ` [PATCH 1/7] conf/machine/include/README: Add readme to explain cpu tunings Mark Hatle
2012-04-04 0:40 ` Chris Larson
2012-04-04 1:58 ` Otavio Salvador
2012-04-03 19:47 ` [PATCH 2/7] conf/machine/include: Cleanup IA tunings to match README Mark Hatle
2012-04-03 19:47 ` [PATCH 3/7] conf/machine/include: Cleanup MIPS " Mark Hatle
2012-04-03 19:51 ` Phil Blundell
2012-04-03 19:57 ` Mark Hatle
2012-04-04 22:10 ` Andreas Oberritter
2012-04-05 4:17 ` Khem Raj
2012-04-06 17:33 ` Mark Hatle
2012-04-06 21:30 ` Khem Raj
2012-04-07 0:10 ` Mark Hatle
2012-04-08 21:34 ` Andreas Oberritter
2012-04-09 15:17 ` Mark Hatle
2012-04-09 15:56 ` Koen Kooi
2012-04-09 16:03 ` Mark Hatle
2012-04-09 20:06 ` Andreas Oberritter
2012-04-09 20:25 ` Mark Hatle
2012-04-09 20:51 ` Andreas Oberritter
2012-04-09 21:00 ` Mark Hatle
2012-04-09 21:03 ` Phil Blundell
2012-04-09 21:21 ` ARM tunings was " Mark Hatle
2012-04-09 21:30 ` Phil Blundell [this message]
2012-04-09 21:44 ` Mark Hatle
2012-04-10 9:23 ` Phil Blundell
2012-04-10 17:39 ` Mark Hatle
2012-04-10 19:33 ` Phil Blundell
2012-04-09 22:19 ` Khem Raj
2012-04-03 19:47 ` [PATCH 4/7] conf/machine/include: Cleanup PowerPC " Mark Hatle
2012-04-04 18:02 ` Matthew McClintock
2012-04-04 19:57 ` Mark Hatle
2012-04-04 18:03 ` Matthew McClintock
2012-04-04 19:59 ` Mark Hatle
2012-04-03 19:47 ` [PATCH 5/7] conf/machine/include: Cleanup ARM " Mark Hatle
2012-04-03 19:47 ` [PATCH 6/7] conf/machine/include: Update SH " Mark Hatle
2012-04-03 19:47 ` [PATCH 7/7] binutils: Inform binutils that armv5e really is valid! Mark Hatle
2012-04-07 8:03 ` Khem Raj
2012-04-04 16:59 ` [PATCH 0/7 v2] Cleanup and document tuning files Saul Wold
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1334007051.3382.19.camel@x121e.pbcl.net \
--to=philb@gnu.org \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox