Status and future of the LLVM backend

[Karel Gardas]

On 12/ 8/14 04:44 PM, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Am Montag, den 08.12.2014, 16:34 +0100 schrieb Karel Gardas:
>> On 12/ 8/14 03:49 PM, Joachim Breitner wrote:
>>> So what does that tell us? Maybe Peter can help us: Is it normal for a
>>> Debian system to pretend that its a pre-v6 ARM, even if the actual
>>> hardware is not?
>>
>> Sorry to get into this, but are you using EABI[1] port of HardFloat[2]
>> port? Wheezy claims to support[2], the release before this was[1].
>
>
> I’m currently working on what Debian calls armel, so [1]. We’ll also
> have to get it working on armhf (which seems to be [2]). Maybe things
> are different there

Yes, but [2] is what Ubuntu is using and it was all right in the past at 
least modulo ghci/linker support which Ben was fixing.

>> I'm not sure what you use so I'm asking, anyway, if you use[1], then
>> it's normal it pretends it's pre-ARMv6. I.e. this is similar to i386
>> debian port in the past which was running happily on i686 but pretend to
>> be i386 to be compatible with all the supported hardware...
>
> Yes, that makes sense.
>
> In that case, the use of the slow spinlock implementation is correct,
> and GHC’s build system needs to be fixed to work in that situation,
> right?

Yes, probably, I've not followed whole thread of discussion unfortunately.
BTW, IIRC this is configure/aclocal.m4 check what's the target ARM 
platrform capability, I'm a little bit surprised this is not working for 
you now. Also please make sure generated platform details are correct in 
settings file...

Karel