[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: cortex / arm-hardfloat-linux-gnueabi (was Re: armelfp: new architecture name for an armel variant)

On Thursday 15 July 2010 00:45:56 Michael Casadevall wrote:
> > I suspect the other architecture licensees (Marvell, Qualcomm) might not
> > be so enthusiastic about this naming...
> Seconded. Since this port will work on all ARM SoCs that meet the
> minimal hardware requirements, it should not be named around a
> specific vendor. 

First, 'cortex' is not a vendor. it's a cpu family. It's not owned by Marvell 
or Qualcomm, but by ARM, if they are OK with us using the name, I don't see 
why the other companies would mind, esp. if they don't offer a cpu in that 
particular family. Our targets are Cortex A8/A9-class cpus, with at least 
vfpv3 and possibly NEON - we'll provide a separate repository with NEON 
binaries where that seems appropriate. So, if Marvell/Qualcomm do provide 
Cortex A8/A9-type cpus -I don't know really, I'm not following all cpu models 
from every company- then I don't see a problem. If not, then the port would 
probably not work on those cpus from these companies anyway. Plain 'armel' 
could/should be used in that case.

> Something vendor neutral like "armfp",
> "armel_hardfloat", etc. is much more appropriate (although we should
> probably try to make it clear in the vendor name that you need
> specific CPU features to fully support it).

If 'cortex' for some reason becomes unsuitable, the next option is armelvfp -
again to denote that the port is strictly for cpus that do include a vfp (as 
Matt said before in this list, armelhf though it sounds really nice, it still 
is not clear whether it supports vfp, fpa, etc.).


Konstantinos Margaritis

Reply to: