Creating armv7 MACHINE_ARCH

[Warner Losh]

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 7:59 AM, Andrew Turner <andrew at fubar.geek.nz> wrote:

>
> > On 8 Jun 2017, at 21:27, Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:
> >
> > While the kernel doesn't really need an armv7 support, there will be a
> > better match to other systems if we create a armv7 MACHINE_ARCH. This
> will
> > be in addition to the armv6 MACHINE_ARCH we have today. This will allow
> us
> > to create a package set optimized for armv7 as well as armv6. While it is
> > true the RPI 1 is the only system that needs armv6 binaries, it's quite
> > popular and the Raspberry Pi folks keep creating new variants with the
> same
> > chip. It would also let us get the package stuff spun up and working
> before
> > we mess with armv6.
> >
> > This would also separate the fate of armv6 and armv7 support at a later
> > time, but the weak consensus I've heard appears to be that the time isn't
> > yet right to discuss retiring armv6 support...
> >
> > Warner
>
> I like this. My understanding is adding armv7 would also fix many of the
> currently broken ports that assume they are being built for armv7 as many
> Linux distros target ARMv7+.
>
> It should also be noted the GENERIC kernel is likely to only ever target
> ARMv7+ even without an armv7 TARGET_ARCH.
>

We already compile all the non-RPI kernels de-facto how we'd do an armv7
TARGET_ARCH.

Is there a rough consensus that we want to do this? Are there any
objections? Should I ask RE? Do I need to do an FCP to write down the
decision with core blessing our understanding of the consensus?

Warner