Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2017 13:14:36 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Jan Beich <jbeich@vfemail.net> Cc: "freebsd-arm@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arm@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.org" <freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: FCP-100: armv7 plan Message-ID: <CANCZdfondSykr1UM0CNTYpVr-6hzyROYn-C_jNC_%2BhO1r6SB2w@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <ingr-3d62-wny@FreeBSD.org> References: <CANCZdfrCwdVOGWunSAjuxHzGcqhuH24iRQg63rvPFXXSmm-C6Q__2138.43810274756$1504912296$gmane$org@mail.gmail.com> <ingr-3d62-wny@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Jan Beich <jbeich@vfemail.net> wrote: > Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> writes: > > > Greetings, > > > > This will serve as 'Last Call' for any objections to the plan to create > an > > armv7 MACHINE_ARCH in FreeBSD, as documented in FCP-0100. > [...] > > Some ports want NEON support but FCP-0100 is vague about FreeBSD-specific > differences between armv6 and armv7. Clang appears to enable NEON for all > *-gnueabi* targets but I have no clue about GCC. Apparently, Android and > Debian don't assume NEON on armv7. > > related: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221898 > Yes. We are vague about it on purpose. Just like we're vague about MMX, MMX2, etc on x86 because different processors can/want use different things. The goal, if it doesn't work already, is for NEON to work if used, but not be required, just like all the other optional features of a CPU. Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANCZdfondSykr1UM0CNTYpVr-6hzyROYn-C_jNC_%2BhO1r6SB2w>