[OE-core] [PATCH 1/2] armv8: update to use armv8-a tune

[akuster808]

On 08/01/2017 08:46 AM, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Mark Hatle <mark.hatle at windriver.com> wrote:
>> On 8/1/17 10:20 AM, Khem Raj wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 8:17 AM, akuster808 <akuster808 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 07/31/2017 12:04 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 7/31/17 10:51 AM, Mark Hatle wrote:
>>>>>> On 7/31/17 12:40 PM, akuster808 wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 07/31/2017 10:31 AM, Mark Hatle wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 7/31/17 12:16 PM, Armin Kuster wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Armin Kuster <akuster808 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>    meta/conf/machine/include/arm/arch-armv8.inc | 25
>>>>>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>>>>    1 file changed, 25 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/meta/conf/machine/include/arm/arch-armv8.inc
>>>>>>>>> b/meta/conf/machine/include/arm/arch-armv8.inc
>>>>>>>>> index 5e832fa..dc1ba5e 100644
>>>>>>>>> --- a/meta/conf/machine/include/arm/arch-armv8.inc
>>>>>>>>> +++ b/meta/conf/machine/include/arm/arch-armv8.inc
>>>>>>>>> @@ -1 +1,26 @@
>>>>>>>>> +DEFAULTTUNE ?= "armv8-a"
>>>>>>>> do we want the '-a'?  The other arm (7) are of the format armv7a (no
>>>>>>>> '-').
>>>>>>> works for me either way.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While we are at it. How would we want ‘armv8.1-a’, ‘armv8.2-a’,
>>>>>>> ‘armv8.3-a'
>>>>>>> formated as?
>>>>>> My preference is to drop the '-'.  As for the '.', I'm not sure.. not
>>>>>> something
>>>>>> we've run across before.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We could just drop it (the '.'), but it really depends on if armv81a
>>>>>> would
>>>>>> confuse someone (familiar with arm) or not.
>>>>> I would suggest to also sync  with other distros and ensure that we dont
>>>>> do something different. Its very costly later. Since applications get
>>>>> ported to most common combination
>>>> Sync what part? naming of file? ( sorry lost regarding your comment)
>>> naming convention for arch e.g.
>>>
>> I'd say Debian/Ubuntu -- Fedora/RH would be the two primary sources I'd look at.
>>   Between debian package names and RPM package names, it should give a clue if
>> there is any community standard forming for those names.
>>
>> (May still be too premature for those environments for the armv8.X-a naming...
>> and I've not seen it discussed on any other lists either.)
> yeah, it will be good to not go through the pain of community doing
> something else later
> like *-*-gnueabihf triplet was invented and to date we keep fixing
> packages for OE
> to account for gnueabihf can be gnueabi + -mfloat-abi=hard but
> packages just assume

I think I now understand the issue. Any interest in having additional 
tune files warehoused somewhere so folks don't have to reinvent the 
wheel? Something like "meta-extra-tunes" ?

I prefer fostering contributions for additional tune files that get 
vetted by the community rather than the multitude of unseen 
implementations I have found sitting around.

regards,
armin

>
>
>> --Mark