Le 25/09/2011 10:40, Andrew Wafaa a écrit :
On 23 September 2011 19:12, Dirk Müller<dmueller@suse.de> wrote:
We've also setup openSUSE:Factory:ARM, which is supposed to bootstrap itself and become a complete Factory distribution. We'll be working on this during the next week. Currently this project is empty and not yet building due to some initial issues still.
Currently we're building armv7el with softfp, although people have been indicating that we should switch to hardfp, and revive armv5el for the softfp targets. Any other comments? My thinking behind preferring hardfp is that the boards/systems that we will hopefully be running on (at least initially) will be the newer variaty which support hardfp. My understanding of the situation is
[...] that there is a significant gain if using hardfp vs softfp. Saying that though I am open to being educated on the situation. I know our competitors/peers are all switching to hardfp too.
According to GCC man page: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/ARM-Options.html softfp option uses hardware instructions. Quote: **************************** -mfloat-abi=name Specifies which floating-point ABI to use. Permissible values are: `soft', `softfp' and `hard'. Specifying `soft' causes GCC to generate output containing library calls for floating-point operations. `softfp' allows the generation of code using hardware floating-point instructions, but still uses the soft-float calling conventions. `hard' allows generation of floating-point instructions and uses FPU-specific calling conventions. The default depends on the specific target configuration. Note that the hard-float and soft-float ABIs are not link-compatible; you must compile your entire program with the same ABI, and link with a compatible set of libraries. **************************** So be sure everyone is speaking about the same thing.
[...]
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-arm+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-arm+help@opensuse.org