Status and future of the LLVM backend
bgamari.foss at gmail.com
Mon Dec 8 16:43:33 UTC 2014
Joachim Breitner <mail at joachim-breitner.de> writes:
> 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 port of HardFloat
>> port? Wheezy claims to support, the release before this was.
> I’m currently working on what Debian calls armel, so . We’ll also
> have to get it working on armhf (which seems to be ). Maybe things
> are different there
Indeed I think Karel has identified the difference in that case. I'm on
armhf. Thanks Karel! I didn't realize that armel supported such old
>> I'm not sure what you use so I'm asking, anyway, if you use, 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,
Indeed. It seems that armel is indeed supposed to support down to
ARMv5 for which we'll need the spinlock fallback.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 472 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the ghc-devs