On 02/11/2015 15:36, Jan Viktorin wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 15:26:19 +0000
--snip--
> It was looking like we can share a lot of common code for both
> architectures. I didn't know how much different are the cpuflags.
CPU flags for ARMv8 are looking like this now. Quite different to the
ARMv7 ones.
static const struct feature_entry cpu_feature_table[] = {
FEAT_DEF(FP, 0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP, 0)
FEAT_DEF(ASIMD, 0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP, 1)
FEAT_DEF(EVTSTRM, 0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP, 2)
FEAT_DEF(AES, 0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP, 3)
FEAT_DEF(PMULL, 0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP, 4)
FEAT_DEF(SHA1, 0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP, 5)
FEAT_DEF(SHA2, 0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP, 6)
FEAT_DEF(CRC32, 0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP, 7)
FEAT_DEF(AARCH32, 0x00000001, 0, REG_PLATFORM, 0)
FEAT_DEF(AARCH64, 0x00000001, 0, REG_PLATFORM, 1)
};
> IMHO, it'd be better to have two directories arm and arm64. I thought
> to refer from arm64 to arm where possible. But I don't know whether is
> this possible with the DPDK build system.
I think both methodologies have their pros and cons. However, I'd lean
towards the common directory with the "filename_32/64.h" scheme, as that
similar to the x86 methodology, and we don't need to tweak the include
paths to pull files from multiple directories.
Dave
