From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 12:09:21 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot] armv5 and OMAP3 Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20170725160921.GH26163@bill-the-cat> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 08:14:57AM -0500, Adam Ford wrote: > The readme file for OMAP indicates that we compile using armv5 to "to > allow more compilers to work" > > We have our arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap3/lowlevel_init.S file also noting > some special assembly insturctions becuse we use armv5. The barriers > defined also indicate we're using CP15 instead of the separate barrier > instructions for armv7 because we're using armv5 instead. > > I just wonder in this day and age when we're noting a GCC version and > generating warnings based on the GCC warning, do we still need to > compile as armv5 any more? It seems like "to allow more compilers to > work" would not really apply any more we're trying to push newer > versions of GCC. So, these are historical notes that really should be corrected. Initially, when ARMv7 support was added, most people did not have compilers new enough to recognize -march=armv7-a. We still even support them, see the logic in arch/arm/Makefile around CONFIG_CPU_V7 (the options are any sort of modern gcc, llvm, ancient gcc). When we move to gcc-6 being the oldest gcc supported for ARM we can fixup those comments and logic as well. -- Tom -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: