[llvmlinux] Unmatching Arch String for Aarch64/arm64

Behan Webster behanw at converseincode.com
Thu Jan 30 17:53:47 UTC 2014


On 01/30/14 02:07, Renato Golin wrote:
> On 30 January 2014 02:17, <zhaoshiz at codeaurora.org
> <mailto:zhaoshiz at codeaurora.org>> wrote:
>
>     It seems linux kernel use arm64 as the arch string for 64-bit ARM. But
>     llvm uses aarch64. As a result, when using native clang, build
>     fails by
>     hitting this error: "Your native clang does not have arm64 support".
>
>
> Hi Zhaoshi,
>
> The kernel is wrong in their nomenclature. AArch64 is the official
> name and should be used in all places to refer to all 64-bit ARM variants.
The kernel ARCH doesn't need to match anything, it merely needs to be
unambiguous. It's just a path in the kernel source (arch/arm64). It's
less convenient than where it the same, but it's not wrong.

Quite frankly most of the people I talk to think that "AArch64" was a
bizarre choice as the official name; most people I've met think "arm64"
is a much more descriptive and sane name. The kernel community has a
habit of naming things what they think they should have been called...

> GCC also uses the same (correct) nomenclature, so I'm surprised that
> the kernel decided to go with the wrong name...
compilers tend to follow architectural names; paths in the kernel do not
have to. They chose a name which makes more sense to the wider
development community.

There was a similar dispute over whether to use ppc or powerpc...

Behan

-- 
Behan Webster
behanw at converseincode.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/llvmlinux/attachments/20140130/71c5b7fe/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the LLVMLinux mailing list