ARM cross compilers [WAS: Re: 200+ packages up for grabs]

Brendan Conoboy blc at redhat.com
Wed Apr 23 17:25:34 UTC 2008


Hans de Goede wrote:
> The question is can we make things generic and still set off reasonably 
> optimal code for a wide range of arm systems. I'm not asking for the 
> last 5-10%, but we should be able to get atleast upto 90% with regards 
> to code-size, but also speed of a custom build toolchain for a specific 
> target if our generic libc becomes much much larger then a special one, 
> and cannot be modularized then I'm afraid that having a generic 
> toolchain isn't much good as lots of arm usage is embedded and size 
> often matters there.

Any arm-linux-gnu{,eabi} toolchain is going to support a pretty wide 
range of arm systems, but not be optimal for any of them.  That's not 
too big a deal if your tools provide a wide range of multilibs and you 
are willing to set the right optimization flags.  It may be worth having 
a wide range of libc versions (Like ia32 Fedora being "i386", but having 
some i686 packages where it counts).

You can also get arm-linux-gnueabi tools from here:

ftp://ftp.ges.redhat.com/private/releng/arm-linux-beta

Like Lennert's tools, these are EABI, but completely self contained in a 
single source rpm.  Making ABI tools is a one line change in the spec file.

-- 
Brendan Conoboy / Red Hat, Inc. / blc at redhat.com




More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list