[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170110181541.7ba97157@rafaela>
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:15:41 -0300
From: "Matias A. Fonzo" <selk@...gora.org>
To: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>
Cc: dragora-users@...gnu.org, musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Darkcrusade 2017Jan05 (cross compiler set)
Hi Szabolcs,
I'm sorry I did not come back quickly to you.
I've made the change[1].
[1] http://dragora.org/repo.fsl/info/7918f35cc0bfc75d
I want to say thanks for all of your information, asking to you about
aarch64. What options for GCC is needed to have aarch64?.
On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 03:10:07 +0100
Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> wrote:
> * Matias A. Fonzo <selk@...gora.org> [2017-01-07 19:55:38 -0300]:
> > On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 15:57:38 +0100
> > Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> wrote:
> > > * Matias A. Fonzo <selk@...gora.org> [2017-01-06 20:31:34
> > > -0300]:
> > > > Thanks! -- I've removed the target file for armv7hl.
> > > >
> > >
> > > i think you should keep the armv7hl and remove the armv8hl one.
> >
> > Are you sure?:
> >
> > armv8hl has the following options for GCC:
> >
> > "--with-arch=armv7-a --with-float=hard --with-fpu=neon
> > --with-tune=cortex-a8"
> >
> > meanwhile armv7hl was:
> >
> > "--with-arch=armv7-a --with-float=hard --with-fpu=neon"
> >
> > 'armv8hl' is like "it can run on the armv7-a but armv8-a has the
> > honor".
> >
> > This is confusing, so.. only 64bit is capable of armv8-a?.
>
> in armvX-a the X is an architecture version (the -a means
> application profile, there are m and r profiles as well)
>
> the latest architecture version is 8 (it has revisions 8.1,
> 8.2 and 8.3 introducing various extensions)
>
> the armv8-a architecture has two execution states: aarch32
> and aarch64, the former is 32bit and backward compatible with
> armv7-a, the later is 64bit.
>
> i think an armv8-a implemetation has to support both aarch32
> and aarch64 execution states (so an armv8-a core can run
> 64bit and 32bit binaries, just like a 64bit x86 cpu)
>
> the 32bit and 64bit toolchains needed different naming since
> they are clearly not abi compatible, for 32bit the old scheme
> was kept: armv8 in a triplet or elf platform string means 32bit,
> while the 64bit toolchain naming uses aarch64 now (various
> projects did not like that and call it arm64 which is visually
> easy to confuse with amd64 and trips up scripts that matched
> arm* for 32bit arm so there is a lot of mess around naming).
>
> cortex-aX is a micro-architecture, it's a cpu core design that
> conforms to an arm architecture version (designed by arm, there
> are other cores not desiged by arm), the X is pretty random,
> cortex-a8 happens to be an old armv7-a core. (cores are usually
> part of a soc that is designed by some vendor who sells the chip)
>
> (older arm cores were called arm7xx, arm8xx,.. arm11xx with
> random xx to add further confusion when somebody talks about
> arm7 or arm8 cpus.)
>
> so calling a cortex-a8 tuned toolchain armv8hl is misleading
> (and not very useful to maintain separately if you have a generic
> armv7-a toolchain anyway: in linux distro land you want a generic
> toolchain so the built binaries are useful for many devices, in
> the mobile world binaries are often tuned for a particular
> microarchitecture because the vendor provides those with the
> device)
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
