Naming / new labeling for ARM-related stuff

[carlocaione]

Currently Zephyr only has an area: ARM label for all the ARM-related PRs. I think we should introduce a new area: ARM64 label for anything related to 64-bit ARM.

This actually sparkled a discussion on IRC about the general naming since on the ARM world we have at least three variants: ARM (32-bit ARMv7), AArch64 (64-bit ARMv8 AArch64) and AArch32 (32-bit ARMv8 AArch32).

[carlocaione]

tagging some ARM interested people: @ioannisg @stephanosio @andrewboie @sandeepbrcm @Abhishek-brcm @galak @MaureenHelm

[ioannisg]

I think we should introduce a new area: ARM64 label for anything related to 64-bit ARM.

Thanks @carlocaione
For x86 architecture we have area: X86 and area: X86_64
So, would it be better to have area: ARM and area: ARM_64 ?

This would mean that

• area: ARM will be for Cortex-M, Cortex-R, but also for 32-bit Cortex-A, which, currently is not supported
• area: ARM_64 will be for Cortex-A AARCH64

This approach is backwards compatible, since the ARM label is kept, but area: ARM still contains several different architecture variants, which we would ideally want to split in different areas.

An alternative solution is to use exact names for all architectures, for better filtering:

• area: ARM Cortex-A, for both AARC32 (not supported now) and AARCH64
• area: ARM Cortex-R
• area: ARM Cortex-M

This solution would deprecate area: ARM label, though, and I am not sure how this will affect searching over lots of closed issues/PRs with the ARM label.

[carlocaione]

I'm perfectly fine with that. area: ARM_64 LGTM.