On 09/07/10 21:40, Paul Brook wrote: [...] > There are several variants of VFPv3. Some have the additional registers > (typically the implementations that also have NEON), some do not. VFPv3 also > introduces some new instructions, so even the variants with the restricted > register file will not work on VFPv2 hardware (e.g. arm11). [...] > You mean VFPv3 v.s. VFPv2? Saying ARMv7 when you actually mean a particular > FPU is extremely unhelpful. Indeed; I've only ever experienced one variant of VFPv3 on ARMv7 devices and assumed it was mandated in the spec. (And I didn't want to get in to the horrible maze of VFP variants.) This just makes it even more important that any hypothetical FPU-based Debian variant thinks very, very carefully about the ABI it uses. There is a standard EABI variant for passing parameters in FPU registers --- but is it sufficiently common to be useful in a cross-platform OS? Are there devices that claim to support VFP that *don't* support this ABI? -- ┌─── ｄｇ＠ｃｏｗｌａｒｋ．ｃｏｍ ───── http://www.cowlark.com ───── │ "Blue is beautiful... blue is best... │ I'm blue! I'm beautiful! I'm best!" │ --- _Dougal and the Blue Cat_
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature