Relax requirement from VFP3 to VFP2 where possible.

src/arm/assembler-arm.h

Index: src/arm/assembler-arm.h
diff --git a/src/arm/assembler-arm.h b/src/arm/assembler-arm.h
index 497d0d411abacd91b3fdba10f8d16061726b1bd7..3dafc61e709c5a73bf193075e093b257c66e1e34 100644
--- a/src/arm/assembler-arm.h
+++ b/src/arm/assembler-arm.h
@@ -510,6 +510,7 @@ class CpuFeatures : public AllStatic {
   static bool IsSupported(CpuFeature f) {
     ASSERT(initialized_);
     if (f == VFP3 && !FLAG_enable_vfp3) return false;
+    if (f == VFP2 && !FLAG_enable_vfp3) return false;

[Sven Panne, 2012/07/25 07:49:06]

This is confusing, I think we should add a new flag for VFP2 or rename the
existing one. In any case our build bots have to be changed accordingly.

     return (supported_ & (1u << f)) != 0;
   }
 
@@ -535,6 +536,8 @@ class CpuFeatures : public AllStatic {
    public:
     explicit Scope(CpuFeature f) {
       unsigned mask = 1u << f;
+      // VFP2 and ARMv2 are implied by VFP3.

[Sven Panne, 2012/07/25 07:49:06]

ARMv7?

+      if (f == VFP3) mask |= 1u << VFP2 | 1u << ARMv7;
       ASSERT(CpuFeatures::IsSupported(f));
       ASSERT(!Serializer::enabled() ||
              (CpuFeatures::found_by_runtime_probing_ & mask) == 0);