On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 7:00 AM, <rsc@golang.org> wrote: > I'd be a bit ...
12 years, 4 months ago
(2012-08-06 02:29:44 UTC)
#5
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 7:00 AM, <rsc@golang.org> wrote:
> I'd be a bit less uneasy about this if we could make the binaries detect
> when they are being used on systems that are too old.
>
this detection would be easy given that we already parse runtime·hwcap from
auxv.
or, better yet, we detect this from sigill handler, and this would be more
reliable
and portable (by portable, i mean portable to my Darwin/ARM port, although
if
you think judging from runtime·hwcap is ok, i will be fine, because
Darwin/ARM
that is capable of running Go would be always Cortex-A8 or higher so this
is a
non issue). the downside of this is that maybe we need to parse the
instruction
to see if it is vmov imm, or some other floating point instructions; but
the main
benefit would be, if the program doesn't use the offending instructions, we
don't
need to tell the user to change anything (this is not the case for our
current runtime,
because it will always use floating point instruction in runtime.check(),
but at least
we can run successfully on VFPv2 systems). of course, from another
perspective,
you might think this kind of uncertainty is the worst feature.
which solution do you think is better?
Issue 5987063: code review 5987063: cmd/5l: use GOARM=7 to gate the VFPv3-only "vmov (imm)"...
(Closed)
Created 12 years, 8 months ago by minux1
Modified 12 years, 2 months ago
Reviewers: dave_cheney.net, rsc
Base URL:
Comments: 0
