Re: Detection of hadware feature => please do not use signal
От | Thomas Munro |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Detection of hadware feature => please do not use signal |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+hUKGKucCptPdnuQtMGpAD3zYTFN0DMpO3D8fDhmuS1c-yBUA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Detection of hadware feature => please do not use signal (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Detection of hadware feature => please do not use signal
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Sun, Nov 24, 2024 at 1:09 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Oh, very interesting! Maybe we need to try -march=armv8-a+crc+fp > (or some spelling like that) if -march=armv8-a+crc doesn't work? Hmm, they were talking about armv7-a, not armv8-a, but it seems related... does it work? The GCC docs give only +nofp, not +fp as an option for 32 bit armv8-a (that is, under "ARM options", as opposed to "aarch64 options"). But I guess GCC is pretty configurable and NetBSD targets some weird hardware... as for why it could be like that (if not a mistake), it looks like it might be technically possible for armv8 (including -a) to lack FP in aarch32 state (unlike aarch64 state), but I went looking for real existing 32-bit only armv8 chips lacking FP and found only stuff like Cortex M23, and they're using armv8-m (embedded profile, lots of other stuff missing or optional). The weakest 32 bit-only armv8-a chip I could find in a quick search was the Cortex A32 but it looks like it has FP. I don't know enough about any of this stuff to guess what's going on here.
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: