From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jianbo Liu <jianbo.liu@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] eal/acl: enable acl for armv7-a
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 18:21:53 +0800
Message-ID: <CAP4Qi3_MkEbYZhjkMn9WzuM0QgJHg2N2Fh3viOPLnBpJ6PwC1w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1448995276-9599-1-git-send-email-jianbo.liu@linaro.org>
 <4116700.gN3RbU5N65@xps13>
 <CAP4Qi3_UT6s+uA8zyvjXWY4mStkn6e6y5eG9cdHKdP49GEhoig@mail.gmail.com>
 <2562409.c2PxG9doT8@xps13>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-vk0-f48.google.com (mail-vk0-f48.google.com
 [209.85.213.48]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 314975952
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue,  8 Dec 2015 11:21:54 +0100 (CET)
Received: by vkbs1 with SMTP id s1so9049445vkb.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 08 Dec 2015 02:21:53 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <2562409.c2PxG9doT8@xps13>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On 8 December 2015 at 18:03, Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote:
> 2015-12-08 15:56, Jianbo Liu:
>> On 8 December 2015 at 10:23, Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote:
>> > 2015-12-08 09:50, Jianbo Liu:
>> >> On 8 December 2015 at 09:18, Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote:
>> >> > 2015-12-03 23:02, Jianbo Liu:
>> >> >> -ifeq ($(CONFIG_RTE_ARCH_ARM64),y)
>> >> >> +ifneq ($(filter y,$(CONFIG_RTE_ARCH_ARM) $(CONFIG_RTE_ARCH_ARM64)),)
>> >> > [...]
>> >> >> +#ifdef RTE_ARCH_ARM
>> >> >> +/* NEON intrinsic vqtbl1q_u8() is not supported in ARMv7-A(AArch32) */
>> >> >
>> >> > I'm convinced there is a good reason why ARMv8 is also called ARCH_ARM64,
>> >> > and ARMv7 may be called AArch32 or ARCH_ARM. But I don't know why?
>> >> >
>> >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/15/133
>> >>
>> >> > Is ARCH_ARM32 or ARCH_ARMv7 too simple?
>> >> > Is it possible to have a 32-bit ARMv8?
>> >> Yes, ARMv8-R/M
>> >
>> > So what does mean CONFIG_RTE_ARCH_ARM?
>> > ARMv7? ARM32?
>> > Please consider a renaming.
>>
>> I'd rather not renaming becase it can be both ARMv7 and AARCH32, which
>> are ISA compatibility.
>> If further differentiation is needed, CONFIG_RTE_ARCH_ARMv7 is added
>> in the config, just like Jan Viktorin did.
>
> I don't understand.
> You say CONFIG_RTE_ARCH_ARM is for ARMv7 and AARCH32, right?
> Both are 32-bit right?
> Why not rename it to CONFIG_RTE_ARCH_ARM32?

I understand that you want to make the naming more clear.
But arm/arm64 are used in Linux kernel, I think it's better to stay the same.