Re: qemuarm: should it really have TUNE_ARCH armv5te?

[Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com>]

On 9/11/12 12:43 PM, Martin Jansa wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 06:37:23PM +0100, Phil Blundell wrote:
>> On Tue, 2012-09-11 at 19:35 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
>>> If this works then DISTRO would have finer control of which DEFAULTTUNE
>>> to use
>>>
>>> 1) default: don't use mtune, optimize only for march (don't mix mtune in
>>> the same feed).
>>>
>>> 2) include optimized-tune.inc in distro.conf: use mtune only for some packages, but
>>> with separate package feed for them
>>>
>>> 3) DEFAULTTUNE = ${OPTDEFAULTTUNE} in distro.conf: always use best mtune
>>> available for MACHINE, but unlike current default, don't mix them in
>>> same package feed
>>>
>>> DEFAULTTUNE = ${OPTDEFAULTTUNE} should also be used for PACKAGE_ARCH ==
>>> MACHINE_ARCH
>>
>> Yeah, that all sounds fairly reasonable to me.  I'm not sure that
>> optimized-tune.inc belongs in oe-core, since its contents is inherently
>> distro-specific, but the general plan seems pretty good.
>
> OK, thanks
>
> I've put optimized-tune.inc to oe-core only to share knowledge of which
> packages are worth using OPTDEFAULTTUNE, but I expect DISTRO maintainers
> to add their own entries too (e.g. for stuff which is only in their own
> layer), so I'm fine with optimized-tune.inc in meta-distro too.

Along those lines.. I'm always asked for optimized crypto libraries (nss, 
openssl, beecrypt, etc...), database (mysql or similar), codecs, sometimes libc 
itself, and graphics drivers.. otherwise nobody seems to care if it's "good enough".

--Mark

> Cheers,
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>