On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 12:04 -0600, Adam Miller wrote:
RAM is a really good point, I think it will be in the ballpark of
(plus or minus a bit). Also, I'd like to open up the conversation
about version of ARM we as a SIG want to support as the efforts start
to ramp up while targeting popular devices. I think ARMv9 might be a
little too aggressive but are there any devices that are still
prominent that are ARMv5? Would it be possible (or even feasible) to
maintain ARMv5, ARMv7, and ARMv9 in parallel and treat them as
The ARM "Family" vs. "Architecture" numbering is wonky (and very
frustrating - larger numbers don't reliably mean newer, bigger, faster,
or better). The SheevaPlug uses an "ARM9E" family chip, which uses the
"ARMv5TEJ" architecture. ARMv5 is a needed current target for that
device and others.
However, the popular Cortex chips use ARMv6M and ARMx7* architecture. Is
there enough performance difference to warrant targeting both
independently? And just the kernel, or userspace as well?