Re: Status for armv7 vs. rust (and go)?
- Reply: Robert Clausecker : "Re: Status for armv7 vs. rust (and go)?"
- In reply to: Robert Clausecker : "Re: Status for armv7 vs. rust (and go)?"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2023 08:19:13 UTC
On May 24, 2023, at 16:08, Robert Clausecker <fuz@fuz.su> wrote: > Hi Mark, Hello. > Am Wed, May 24, 2023 at 12:52:26PM -0700 schrieb Mark Millard: >> May be things build but there are operational problems? >> >> Anyway, I'd be interested to learn of whatever types of >> armv7 problems rust may be currently having. (Rust being >> a large build is a known issue.) > > The main problem with Rust ports on armv7 is that many of them have > LLVM run into address space exhaustions, probably due to trying to > build programs with LTO. It's hard to diagnose these issues. > > There are also a number of recurring portability problems due to > time_t not being a long on armv7, but these are easy to patch. I had forgotten, but on the HoneyComb (16 Cortex-A72 cores) I have in its /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/main-CA7-make.conf : . . . .if ${.CURDIR:M*/lang/*rust*} MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER=8 .elif . . . . . . If I remember right, too many parallel jobs lead to hitting a process size limit that stopped the build. I've not experimented with between 8 and 16 (non-inclusive). With 8 I just had 1.70 build: [00:00:14] [01] [00:00:00] Building lang/rust | rust-1.70.0 [02:16:24] [01] [02:16:10] Finished lang/rust | rust-1.70.0: Success (The process size limit can be smaller for cortext-a72's doing aarch32/armv7 activity than on a cortex-a7 armv7 system. That might contribute to hitting the issue.) === Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com