Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2022 18:27:45 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: toolchain@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 265241] Runaway builds on armv6, armv7 in port cad/iverilog Message-ID: <bug-265241-29464-kHnaFIcXjU@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-265241-29464@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-265241-29464@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D265241 --- Comment #16 from Mark Millard <marklmi26-fbsd@yahoo.com> --- (In reply to Ed Maste from comment #15) But do the eMAG's support direct aarch32 and armv7 code execution, like Cortex-A72's do, for example? I think that was Yuri's point in the suggestion. If they did, then armv7 poudriere jails could be used to build ports for armv7 without use of of the problematical qemu environment. (That is what I do on the HoneyComb that I have access to. But that is a 16 core Cortex-A72 context. At this point I build for main [so: 14] but could easily build for stable/13 and releng/13.1 via such armv7 jails. I've done so in the past.) (I'll note that there are a few armv7 ports that work when there are only 4 cores put to use but that fail for memory space issues when 16 cores are put to use instead. I've actually test built such on a RPi4B to check the status on rare occasion. So I'm not claiming there would be no oddities for building on aarch64 that was also aarch32/armv7 capable, but far fewer than for qemu use.) --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-265241-29464-kHnaFIcXjU>