ARMv4 vs ARMv6
andy at openmoko.com
Thu Oct 16 10:59:57 CEST 2008
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Somebody in the thread at some point said:
| Op 16 okt 2008, om 02:01 heeft Andy Green het volgende geschreven:
|> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|> Hash: SHA1
|> Somebody in the thread at some point said:
|> | According to the available datasheet the core of the s3c6410 is a
|> | ARM1176JZF-S which is armv6 .
|> Mmm Graeme already noted it.
|> | If using the newer instructions brings even the slightest acceleration
|> | it should be used imho.
|> If the packaging tools just can't deal with it,
| This is exactly what openembedded has been designed to do and what
| Angstrom (the distribution openmoko uses) has been doing for years. Have
| a look at http://www.angstrom-distribution.org/repo/?pkgname=fennec and
| you'll see that packages are available for ARM architectures ranging
| from strongarm to the latest cortex-a8.
Great, but this situation reminds me a lot of i386 and x86_64, there is
also the aspect that x86_64 / ARMv6 can run v6 and v4 packages, but i386
/ ARMv4 can't run v6 packages. It took quite a while for that to settle
down in the packaging tools and the distros.
If someone is making OpenMooCow 2.0 and they have a GTA02 and GTA02-only
toolchain, it would be good if GTA03 folks are able to install it OK.
Or, we should send out a single toolchain+(2 x libs) that is v4 and v6
ready, and make it easy for the MooCow guy to generate v4 and v6 binary.
~ Or, we should have the toolchain issue source packages, which Moocow
guy will offer with his v4 binary, and make it easy for anyone to recook
a source package built on v4 toolchain+libs against v6 toolchain+libs.
So I think there are some things to muse on here.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the devel