[U-Boot-Users] FW: FW: [PATCH][ARM] Rationalize ARM compiler options

[Peter Pearse]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Pearse [mailto:peter.pearse at arm.com] 
> Sent: 19 February 2008 08:55
> To: 'Ulf Samuelsson'
> Subject: RE: [U-Boot-Users] FW: [PATCH][ARM] Rationalize ARM 
> compiler options
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ulf Samuelsson [mailto:ulf at atmel.com]
> > Sent: 18 February 2008 23:05
> > To: Peter Pearse; u-boot-users at lists.sourceforge.net
> > Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] FW: [PATCH][ARM] Rationalize 
> ARM compiler 
> > options
> > 
> > >> " 
> > >> 
> > >> If so I'll put -msoft-float in all arm config.mk files.
> > 
> > Please DON'T!
> > This *forces* you to compile U-Boot with a compiler suite which is 
> > configured to generate soft-float.
> > If you happen to use a compiler which does not support soft-float,
> > I.E: uses NWFPE, then the build will fail.
> >
> 
> Locally remove the option.
>  
> > Also what happens if you have a toolchain built without V5 support?
> > Will the build complete?
> 
> Locally change the option.
> 
> My postion remains that U-Boot is supplied to build with the 
> latest ELDK toolchain.
> Supporting all possible toolchains (and all possible builds 
> of those toolchains) is too much effort. 
> 
> (even including the ARM RealView tools, which would, of 
> course, provide several major advantages ;-) )
> 
> > >> 
> > >> My position is:
> > >> "
> > >> The main (arm) tree processor options should use the correct 
> > >> architecture option for the processor (provided this option is 
> > >> accepted without error or warning  by the ELDK arm
> > >> toolchains) Users using compilers which do not support 
> the correct 
> > >> architecture should be made aware of this.
> > >> Should they wish to use another compiler they can change
> > this option
> > >> locally.
> > >> "
> > 
> > Why not make this user tunable.
> > If you want to mess about with V4 vs V5 support you should, 
> but don't 
> > enforce this for people that could care less.
> 
> Exactly - it builds & works OOB with the ELDK toolchain, no 
> effort, other than installation, for those who dont care.
> 
> Those users who do care can change the code locally to suit 
> their own requirements. 
> 
> If they have sufficient knowledge to care I dont see this 
> being much extra effort for them.....
>  
> And if they want to encourage others to do the same they can 
> document it in doc/README.ARM.config.mk.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Peter