public inbox for u-boot@lists.denx.de
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] merge arm64 to arm
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 08:20:19 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <52120D83.2070105@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <A1A6EA40F8503D48BB002B42BD65974E0A114A73@039-SN2MPN1-013.039d.mgd.msft.net>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 08/18/2013 11:46 PM, Sharma Bhupesh-B45370 wrote:
> [Re-posting as original msg was rejected due to HTML content..]
> 
>>> FengHua <fenghua@phytium.com.cn> writes:
>>> 
>>>>> 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.
>>>> 
>>>> 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.
>>> 
>>> ARMv8 defines both a 32-bit (aarch32) and a 64-bit (aarch64) 
>>> instruction set.  The naming you are suggesting would be 
>>> misleading.
>>> 
>> 
>> aarch32 state is compatible with armv7. armv8 directory only 
>> provide aarch64 state support. as you said, it would be a little 
>> misleading.
>> 
> 
> ARMv8 ARM (Architecture Reference Manual) mentions that the ARMv8 
> architecture has support for both AArch32 and AArch64 and the ARM 
> can switch b/w the two instruction sets via exceptions.
> 
> So, whether choosing a naming convention similar to linux 
> (arch/arm64) would be more suitable is something to consider (even 
> though some of the files might be a copy of what is available in 
> arch/arm/cpu/armv7)?

I think we'll see what happens with a single directory first.  We
aren't talking about a binary that has to work on all cases (right
now...) and we want to avoid massive duplication of all of the C code
that really won't change.

- -- 
Tom
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=/nnu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

       reply	other threads:[~2013-08-19 12:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <A1A6EA40F8503D48BB002B42BD65974E0A114A73@039-SN2MPN1-013.039d.mgd.msft.net>
2013-08-19 12:20 ` Tom Rini [this message]
2013-08-19 12:32   ` [U-Boot] merge arm64 to arm Måns Rullgård
2013-08-19 12:53     ` Tom Rini
2013-08-19 13:01       ` Måns Rullgård
2013-08-19 13:10         ` Tom Rini
2013-08-19 16:55           ` Scott Wood
2013-08-19 17:33             ` Måns Rullgård
2013-08-19 17:52               ` Tom Rini
2013-08-19 19:50                 ` Måns Rullgård
2013-08-19 19:53                   ` Tom Rini
2013-08-19 18:08               ` Scott Wood
2013-08-17  4:54 FengHua
2013-08-17 11:35 ` Måns Rullgård
2013-08-17 14:32   ` FengHua
2013-08-17 14:52     ` Tom Rini
2013-08-17 14:55     ` Måns Rullgård
2013-08-18  1:03       ` FengHua
2013-08-19 16:34       ` Scott Wood

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=52120D83.2070105@ti.com \
    --to=trini@ti.com \
    --cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
    /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