cortex / arm-hardfloat-linux-gnueabi (was armelfp: new architecture name for an armel variant)
 

Hello,

2010/7/6, Hector Oron <hector.oron@gmail.com>:
> Dear armel porters,
[...]

It is past over a week and people is wanting to start.

I would like to point you to a parallel discussion hold at recent
created Linaro group [1]

There is also a wiki page for the port [2]

The one that bootstraps the port picks the name.

Genesi have recommended 'cortex' as Debian architecture name and
'arm-hardfloat-linux-gnueabi' as triplet. This has been in fact
approved and endorsed -and actually encouraged- by ARM itself, they
really liked the idea of having a debian-cortex port.

So, thanks all for the comments and the high interest.

As Debian Developer I would like to see this port to become an
official Debian port someday and have it hosted at debian-ports.org
whenever posible. I am really trying my best for this work to be part
of the community if community wants it (and it is the right thing to
do (TM)), but you also have to understand, that Genesi (always kind
and willing to work with Debian community) would like to push this in
the best interests of performance for their products present and
future.

[1] http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-dev/2010-July/subject.html
[2] http://wiki.debian.org/ArmHardFloatPort

--
Héctor Orón

"Our Sun unleashes tremendous flares expelling hot gas into the Solar
System, which one day will disconnect us."


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: AANLkTikDNXA7bu1KQLU6-EIDMkNTpXhr0nBGCi9nImnI@mail.gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTikDNXA7bu1KQLU6-EIDMkNTpXhr0nBGCi9nImnI@mail.gmail.com

cortex / arm-hardfloat-linux-gnueabi (was armelfp: new architecture name for an armel variant)
 

On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>> Genesi have recommended 'cortex' as Debian architecture name and
>> 'arm-hardfloat-linux-gnueabi' as triplet. This has been in fact
>> approved and endorsed -and actually encouraged- by ARM itself, they
>> really liked the idea of having a debian-cortex port.
>
> I suspect the other architecture licensees (Marvell, Qualcomm) might not be so
> enthusiastic about this naming...
>

Seconded. Since this port will work on all ARM SoCs that meet the
minimal hardware requirements, it should not be named around a
specific vendor. Something vendor neutral like "armfp",
"armel_hardfloat", etc. is much more appropriate (although we should
probably try to make it clear in the vendor name that you need
specific CPU features to fully support it).

> Paul
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201007142233.20904.paul@codesourcery.com
>
>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: AANLkTin64_HQbM0eW1E6rVUDy4ixjNqjnLKZNXjIA0GE@mail .gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTin64_HQbM0eW1E6rVUDy4ixjNqjnLKZNXjIA0GE@mail .gmail.com

cortex / arm-hardfloat-linux-gnueabi (was armelfp: new architecture name for an armel variant)
 

It's ARM's architecture and theirs to license, not Marvell's or Qualcomm's.

Qualcomm won't be so particularly annoyed as they get a big reference
in ARM's manuals (Qualcomm Scorpion is referenced).

In the end by far the most common (in terms of chips using it) variant
of armv7 is the cortex series. If another manufacturer uses their ARM
license to make a new core design that is compatible, good for them.
That doesn't stop the official armv7-a/r/m line being Cortex, and for
the vast majority of people out there to consistently compare the
armv7 designs they make to the capabilities of the "standard" ARM
Cortex designs.

Right now we're "fighting" over whether we call it armelhf armelfp or
whatever else. Sure, they are nice descriptive names but they do not
specify which FPU is in use in most case, or revision, or make it
known at first glance that it is the "hard" float EABI. The endianness
and ABI version are irrelevant, and only got tacked onto the end to
differentiate the arm and armel ports where someone made the decision.
The Cortex-A series specification - which even Qualcomm and Marvell
adhere to on their own cores since armv7 architecture specification
defined in that documentation dictates it - that an armv7 CPU has the
option to have a VFPv3 FPU and implement the "d16" variant at the very
least, and "d32" if you use NEON, however you implemented it.

In order to distance the port from the arm and armel ports which will
work *absolutely everywhere* under those restrictions placed by the
ports (eabi and little-endian in the latter instance) I think "cortex"
works, in lieu of calling it something confusing like "armv7" (which
IMO ARM screwed up since there is an ARM7 core and an armv7 core
(which is actually ARM11 or so) and the difference between a core and
a programmer's interface is absolutely irrelevant to a Linux port
anyway, so the numbers are just in the way of instantly knowing which
one it works on, and you're going to have to document it. How is it
worse to say "cortex" which gives a broad indication of where it will
work, and the same documentation to say "all processors in ARM's
Cortex-A series, plus Qualcomm Scorpion and whatever is in the Marvell
Dove"?

Marvell and Qualcomm should be happy that someone is actually doing
this in the mainstream, regardless of the name. Ubuntu will accept
whatever Debian did. In any case, Genesi is going to proceed with a
port under this name regardless of a decision by Debian, because we
don't want to be involved in the politiking over how many letters and
how recursive the acronym is. We consulted with the ARM Cortex-A9
product manager and he likes the idea, gave us a blessing, we're ready
to move forward.

--
Matt Sealey <matt@genesi-usa.com>
Product Development Analyst, Genesi USA, Inc.



On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 4:33 PM, Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>> Genesi have recommended 'cortex' as Debian architecture name and
>> 'arm-hardfloat-linux-gnueabi' as triplet. This has been in fact
>> approved and endorsed -and actually encouraged- by ARM itself, they
>> really liked the idea of having a debian-cortex port.
>
> I suspect the other architecture licensees (Marvell, Qualcomm) might not be so
> enthusiastic about this naming...
>
> Paul
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201007142233.20904.paul@codesourcery.com
>
>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: AANLkTim8W2UjGbhb-crxquGabhjP-wpq5wHuFcTebUAE@mail.gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTim8W2UjGbhb-crxquGabhjP-wpq5wHuFcTebUAE@mail.gmail.com

cortex / arm-hardfloat-linux-gnueabi (was armelfp: new architecture name for an armel variant)
 

Hello,

2010/7/15, Konstantinos Margaritis <markos@genesi-usa.com>:
> First, 'cortex' is not a vendor. it's a cpu family. It's not owned by
> Marvell
> or Qualcomm, but by ARM, if they are OK with us using the name, I don't see
> why the other companies would mind, esp. if they don't offer a cpu in that
> particular family. Our targets are Cortex A8/A9-class cpus, with at least
> vfpv3 and possibly NEON - we'll provide a separate repository with NEON
> binaries where that seems appropriate. So, if Marvell/Qualcomm do provide
> Cortex A8/A9-type cpus -I don't know really, I'm not following all cpu
> models
> from every company- then I don't see a problem. If not, then the port would
> probably not work on those cpus from these companies anyway. Plain 'armel'
> could/should be used in that case.

I personally like 'cortex' as it is much clear. Nowadays we still have
users that ask what they should use 'arm' or 'armel' and what are
their differences.

Cheers,
--
Héctor Orón

"Our Sun unleashes tremendous flares expelling hot gas into the Solar
System, which one day will disconnect us."


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: AANLkTikarwjJVJqNjL7C3Ws50TSzH3jryarIBPXH3kYg@mail .gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTikarwjJVJqNjL7C3Ws50TSzH3jryarIBPXH3kYg@mail .gmail.com

cortex / arm-hardfloat-linux-gnueabi (was armelfp: new architecture name for an armel variant)
 

On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Lennart Sorensen
<lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 05:11:16PM -0500, Matt Sealey wrote:
>> It's ARM's architecture and theirs to license, not Marvell's or Qualcomm's.
>>
>
> Oh I hadn't realized cortex was an ARM name for that particular feature
> set. *In that case I can see how it makes lots of sense as the name.
> I for some stupid reason thought that was a product name of some ARM
> licensee.

It's not really a name for a feature set, so much as.. well.. If you
go grab a Cortex-A8 (i.e. a CPU) license you probably get as a job lot
the libraries to make an ARMv7-A CPU core, the VFPv3, NEON stuff. It's
part of the architecture in about the same way as AMD Vision is the
Athlon Neo line, and Intel Centrino is anything with
CPU/NB/SB/Wireless all from Intel. A brand that lets you know, these
features are in there somewhere and you can count on a certain level
of functionality within a limited subset of options. You can directly
compare Cortex-A8 "branded" processors from different vendors. This
helps ARM sell more licenses and gives companies like Genesi the
ultimate choice of silicon vendor based on the IP that the silicon
vendor adds and not the CPU core itself. We're solid on the fact that
the Cortex-A8 and Cortex-A9 are damn nice little CPUs... the choice is
in, what graphics is in there with it, does it support MS-CAN, how
many SPI buses.. :)

The other option is you go get an architecture license which lets you
go out and implement the instruction set with your own special
pipelines and bus interfaces to the cache and other bolt-ons like
custom SIMD units. You lose the ability to say it's a Cortex-A8 but
Freescale, Samsung, TI (all cpu licensees) and Marvell, Qualcomm
(architecture licensees) have already spoken with 2 years of chips
that meet pretty much a standard set of requirements which you can
attribute to this grouping of features that ARM have dictated under
the banner of their Cortex-A8 brand even if they don't all use it. The
silicon vendors are tied in by what each other are doing and how they
can do as little software work as possible :) What a Debian port with
hard floating point ABI in use might spur (perhaps once all the
derivatives catch on, Ubuntu especially as they have their hooks in
commercial interests like Adobe) is greater adoption of a better base
level of CPU from ARM-licensee silicon vendors.

Yes, Marvell Armada 500 and 600 support a different armv7 core (it's
licensed but it's not Cortex-A, it's Sheeva P4J) and Qualcomm's
Scorpion core is on some kind of performance-enhancing drug, and even
Samsung/Intrinsity/Apple's A4 "Hummingbird" is Cortex-A8 with some
special power features and a speed bump but they don't advertise it as
ANYTHING (it's just a.. you can't please everyone's brand names or
feature sets, so we felt it's best to go up to the top level and ask,
what do ARM call this selection of features? They are all ARM
licensees so, they are in a common group and it does not pander to
individual silicon vendors (except perhaps those who took the Cortex
brand where it will be more obvious). Who will this benefit most?
Right this very second, all of them, with a little more emphasis on
ARM who get to make it look like all their processor designs are
suddenly 20-40% faster :)

In the end this port will not work on every plausible (even if never
produced) Cortex-A series variant. Some might not have an FPU - we
haven't seen one yet though. But it will work on some other compatible
architectures like Scorpion and Sheeva P4J and Hummingbird. This is a
matter for documentation in the same way armelhf would have to explain
what CPUs this actually encompasses (and what the difference is
between arm and armel in the first place). But it will support pretty
much everyone to the specifications we've recommended even if they
hate that they are not getting their brand name in there :)

--
Matt Sealey <matt@genesi-usa.com>
Product Development Analyst, Genesi USA, Inc.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: AANLkTimnDFo2yM9WOCkfrZ0fz3Ch1FEkxyn8hhRlHfCZ@mail .gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTimnDFo2yM9WOCkfrZ0fz3Ch1FEkxyn8hhRlHfCZ@mail .gmail.com

cortex / arm-hardfloat-linux-gnueabi (was armelfp: new architecture name for an armel variant)
 

Hello,

2010/7/15, Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>:
> It isn't. "Cortex" is the marketing name for the current set of CPU core
> implementations designed by ARM ltd. Calling the armv7 port "cortex" is
> equivalent to calling the i686 port "pentium" [1].

But i?86 is ABI compatible, while ARM ABI is a full mess AFAICS and
those ABI are incompatible, requiring new Debian architectures.

> [1] Those paying attention will note that not all pentium cores are i686.
> The
> Cortex family includes cores that are not armv7 (Specifically armv6-m).

M profiles are out of the scope of the port, only A profiles are
interesting and maybe R when compatible.

While the name does not seem to conflict within Debian. It seems that
Ubuntu/Linaro have a problem with it, and too many politics seem to
happen. I would like to have a name that suits all of us (not only
Ubuntu/Linaro, but any other posible third party). Maybe Ubuntu/Linaro
could develop the way arround the naming if it does not suit them?

It was said, the one that bootstraps the port, picks the name.

Genesi has always been kind to Debian Developers, giving hardware
away, and paying people to do the work, they are really commited to
Debian at the moment, and it would be nice (from my point of view) to
have a Debian port with such characteristics in Debian.

I would also like to state that I am (like Debian) commercial
independent, nor Genesi pays me, nor Ubuntu/Linaro pays me. My
interest is best for Debian community and good support for my prefered
gadgets with my prefered distribution.

Cheers and have a good day,
--
Héctor Orón

"Our Sun unleashes tremendous flares expelling hot gas into the Solar
System, which one day will disconnect us."


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: AANLkTikevkcKQ6fLCJA5YQfdBDJMZK4w7nKV0HqhaCrG@mail .gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTikevkcKQ6fLCJA5YQfdBDJMZK4w7nKV0HqhaCrG@mail .gmail.com