[OE-core] [PATCH 1/3] Add ARM tune file overhaul based largely on work from Mark Hatle

[Khem Raj]

On 07/27/2011 07:58 AM, Mark Hatle wrote:
> For the tune names..  armv5 means I want classic ARM instructions, while armv5t
> means I was thumb instructions.
>
> So armv5 and armv5t are distinct in the contents of the tunings.

fwiw its confusing since armv5t will be confused with arm architecture 
context where it means 'yes I have thumb and you can use it if you want'
but what you are saying here is that if its armv5t then it means 'arm 
v5t and yes use thumb' It should be called something else probably to 
make that distinction

>
> There were armv5's without thumb support.. but that doesn't matter much.  A
> machine with thumb is compatible (run-time) with one that does not.  A machine
> w/o thumb is not necessarily compatible with thumb executables.
>
>>> >>  +# Little Endian + VFP/DSP
>>> >>  +AVAILTUNES += "armv5-vfp armv5t-vfp armv5hf-vfp armv5thf-vfp"
>> >
>> >  The comment doesn't seem to match the code here since this is the
>> >  section for chips without DSP.  Incidentally, the name "dsp" for this
>> >  feature seems quite a bad one: maybe we should just call it "armv5e".
> Yes, the mention of DSP should be using the 'e'.  What I'm not sure of is does
> the "dsp" capabilities actually change any of the code or support generated.  If
> not then we can ignore it.
>
> For armv5 this gives us:
>
> armv5, armv5t, armv5e, armv5te... add in their VFP variants and the hard float
> EABI...
>
> --Mark
>