| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Burd <greg(at)burd(dot)me> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Fix ARM64/MSVC atomic memory ordering issues on Win11 by adding explicit DMB barriers |
| Date: | 2025-12-10 21:31:33 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKG+v8uqSibXXg5c1+qwJVY0nmpp_2YbTCpN8qrFwb+dvew@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 5:32 AM Greg Burd <greg(at)burd(dot)me> wrote:
> Rebased with only minor changes to meson.build this patch is ready for review/commit as it is passing tests on my aarch64 Win11 MSVC system. Also note that this system I'm testing on is ready to become a member of the buildfarm (application submitted) and monitor this combo in perpetuity.
- if cc.links(prog, name: '__crc32cb, __crc32ch, __crc32cw, and
__crc32cd without -march=armv8-a+crc',
...
+ if host_machine.cpu_family() == 'aarch64'
I think this new nesting of the CRC32 feature tests breaks the test on
"armv7" distros (in our build farm, that's a bunch of RPis running
Debian/Raspbian, but at least FreeBSD and NetBSD also support
"armv7"). Any ARM chip made since around 2011 is really an ARMv8+
chip running Aarch32 code and can thus reach the ARMv8 instructions.
For example "grison" says:
checking build system type... (cached) armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf
...
checking which CRC-32C implementation to use... ARMv8 CRC instructions
with runtime check
-#define S_UNLOCK(lock) \
+#define S_UNLOCK(lock) \
Bogus whitespace change.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Álvaro Herrera | 2025-12-10 21:41:10 | Re: not translating backend types for ps and log_line_prefix |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2025-12-10 21:29:50 | Re: pg_plan_advice |