[U-Boot] merge arm64 to arm

[Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>]

On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 10:32:43PM +0800, FengHua wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > -----????????????-----
> > ?????????: "M??ns Rullg??rd" <mans@mansr.com>
> > ????????????: 2013???8???17??? ?????????
> > ?????????: FengHua <fenghua@phytium.com.cn>
> > ??????: u-boot at lists.denx.de, trini at ti.com, scottwood at freescale.com
> > ??????: Re: merge arm64 to arm
> > 
> > FengHua <fenghua@phytium.com.cn> writes:
> > 
> > > hi tom,
> > > hi albert,
> > > yes, it's right. the u-boot could be more uniformly and maintainable
> > > if merging armv8 to arm architecture. I will try to migrate arm64 to
> > > armv8 subarchitecture of arm. do you have any other advice?
> > 
> > Why?  The architectures are vastly different, arm64 (aarch64) being only
> > loosely inspired by the 32-bit arm.  It is not like with x86/amd64 where
> > a lot of code can be shared.
> > 
> > -- 
> > M??ns Rullg??rd
> > mans at mansr.com
> 
> Of course, with a seperated architecture the arm64 code will be clear
> and simple. when it merged with arm a few file should be duplicated
> with the name "_v8" appended and many macro switch should be added.
> but most of the code will be in armv8 directory which paralleled with
> armv7. it seems that this implementation are more nice.

Exactly.  Most things will end up in arch/arm/cpu/armv8/ and we won't
have to duplicate the "hook the arch up with the rest of U-Boot" code,
which is C anyhow, for the most part.

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20130817/91d2286c/attachment.pgp>