On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 09:55:49AM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > * Aurelien Jarno <[email protected]> [2010-07-16 09:38]: > > BTW, has anybody thought about increasing the minimum requirement for > > the armel port, for example to armv5? Available machines has evolved, > > maybe the port should do the same. > Indeed. From Paul's emails, I'm getting the feeling that moving the > armel port to armv5
My impression is the ARMv4t -> ARMV5 doesn't really gain many useful instructions (PLD, CLZ), so it is not neccesarily worth it, at least as long as there ar ARMv4t users (basicly openmoko). > and proving optimized libraries for some things might be the way to go. And when the performance critical code is not in a library but in a binary? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
