From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <benedikt.meurer@googlemail.com>
X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72C757EE80
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 19:42:40 +0100 (CET)
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  benedikt.meurer@googlemail.com) identity=pra;
  client-ip=209.85.214.53;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="benedikt.meurer@googlemail.com";
  x-sender="benedikt.meurer@googlemail.com";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of
  benedikt.meurer@googlemail.com designates 209.85.214.53 as
  permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.214.53;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="benedikt.meurer@googlemail.com";
  x-sender="benedikt.meurer@googlemail.com";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1"
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@mail-bk0-f53.google.com) identity=helo;
  client-ip=209.85.214.53;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="benedikt.meurer@googlemail.com";
  x-sender="postmaster@mail-bk0-f53.google.com";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Al0CAONIT1HRVdY1g2dsb2JhbABDh3G9f4FyFg4BAQEKCxISBiSCJAEBBAFAAQE3AQQLCwsHBhwSNAEFAQ4OBhOIAQEDCQYEpCSKcoQ7AQWDQwpADYlVBo5lMweCX2GWao8iP4Qu
X-IPAS-Result: Al0CAONIT1HRVdY1g2dsb2JhbABDh3G9f4FyFg4BAQEKCxISBiSCJAEBBAFAAQE3AQQLCwsHBhwSNAEFAQ4OBhOIAQEDCQYEpCSKcoQ7AQWDQwpADYlVBo5lMweCX2GWao8iP4Qu
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,901,1355094000"; 
   d="scan'208";a="7643976"
Received: from mail-bk0-f53.google.com ([209.85.214.53])
  by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 24 Mar 2013 19:42:39 +0100
Received: by mail-bk0-f53.google.com with SMTP id e19so520301bku.12
        for <multiple recipients>; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 11:42:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlemail.com; s=20120113;
        h=x-received:content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date
         :cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer;
        bh=o3jONEhFz6LF4VFENhe9BVJrj9etL8jQzi6zxsWrGG0=;
        b=WRseqjQBx7ABQyCXpVvvibdg9HQ/G7yltop5Uk4Dc9YVdXcjOrK02ZtbZ+3ZCeZ8cH
         uTFEfiKB47gFG2qu6V11D6GuSxyOingUSgRWZtZDc4IHGpZmFOeiHuVAj4qy2gTLW2VN
         UE6eriYXb72FomMDHjt8jlGC8vf3xZWzMGr6HFDqH7J+VmCH01YuPmBA8VXKZJ2+ov3d
         5wGRuUMmnVLdDp4Dn/t4niFe7Y71LIzpRb4wuNf5qbxCeuF26+Mfx1PudOtgzJIxha8d
         XIgwvAhVSr9s+NaytwmqZ3nzFLz5OsLn+VkiHIrMPjW2HRipxtcdWRp84VR3Y9qswArA
         fcYA==
X-Received: by 10.204.200.131 with SMTP id ew3mr4198694bkb.103.1364150559466;
        Sun, 24 Mar 2013 11:42:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tatooine.in.benediktmeurer.de (sign-4db6b2a0.pool.mediaWays.net. [77.182.178.160])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id w6sm372283bkz.17.2013.03.24.11.42.37
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Sun, 24 Mar 2013 11:42:38 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\))
From: Benedikt Meurer <benedikt.meurer@googlemail.com>
In-Reply-To: <514ED893.5040509@inria.fr>
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 19:42:41 +0100
Cc: caml-list@inria.fr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5372E1BA-6412-40F4-9AF7-412249E422A6@gmail.com>
References: <20130323232545.GB30390@annexia.org> <514ED893.5040509@inria.fr>
To: Xavier Leroy <Xavier.Leroy@inria.fr>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503)
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] AArch64 (64 bit ARM) support?


On Mar 24, 2013, at 11:42 , Xavier Leroy <Xavier.Leroy@inria.fr> wrote:

> On 24/03/13 00:25, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>>=20
>> Just wondering if anyone is looking at AArch64 support for ocamlopt?
>=20
> I had a look at the ARM v8 / AArch64 documents when they were
> released.
>=20
> From a compiler writer's point of view, this architecture looks pretty
> clean and unproblematic (thanks, ARM!), so I think it will be pretty
> easy to support it in ocamlopt.  It looks like one of those ports that
> can be completed in one week of work.
>=20
> Personally, I'd rather wait until real hardware is available, because
> developing with an emulator is a pain.

I was hoping to get access to preliminary ARM v8 hardware at my new employe=
r later this year, so I could start adding the necessary changes to the ARM=
 backend.

> Cheers,
> - Xavier Leroy

greets,
Benedikt=