On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:41:03PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:19:19AM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 01:13:57AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > > > - What for ILP32 on ARM64? > > > See https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/13/814 > > > and http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.uclibc.buildroot/121100 > > > Briefly, > > > - for compatibility; > > > - for performance; > > > - for memory saving. > > > Does anyone actually need this ABI? And by "need" I don't mean a > > tick-box on product fliers but actually someone going to use it on real > > systems in the field. Because I'm not keen on maintaining an ABI in the > > kernel just as a PR exercise. I have yet to see conclusive benchmarks > > that ILP32 is a real win vs LP64 but happy to be proven wrong. > > Indeed. On that subject there was some discussion at Linaro Connect > last week about work (being done outside Linaro, not sure how public it > is at this point) to pull together the current state of the art into a > Docker container image which people can use for benchmarking and as a > reference for how to pull things together. That should help with the > analysis, it'll at least make it easier for other people to reproduce > any benchmarking results.
Hi, Mark, >From you, I got more on what happens with ILP32 than from my company. Thank you. I know people participated Linaro Connect, and will ask them for details. And, if possible, will share it here. BR, Yury. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
