Fix build when targeting Arm64EC using Clang #2012
Conversation
|
Thanks for your pull request! It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA). View this failed invocation of the CLA check for more information. For the most up to date status, view the checks section at the bottom of the pull request. |
| @@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ inline BENCHMARK_ALWAYS_INLINE int64_t Now() { | |||
| int64_t ret; | |||
| __asm__ volatile("rdtsc" : "=A"(ret)); | |||
| return ret; | |||
| #elif defined(__x86_64__) || defined(__amd64__) | |||
| #elif (defined(__x86_64__) || defined(__amd64__)) && !defined(__arm64ec__) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is __x86_64__ or __amd64__ really defined when __arm64ec__ is defined?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You should think of Arm64EC as "x64 code running on an Arm64 machine with a weird instruction set". So, by default, it needs to use the x64 layout for objects to be compatible with any real x64 code that is linked into the same binary or called across binaries.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, but ARM is ARM, it is not Intel arch, which x86_64 and AMD64 are.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please add a code comment to explicitly state this, err, very interesting design decision...
|
@dpaoliello thank you! |
These fix building benchmark targeting Arm64EC Windows when using Clang (i.e., with Clang's preprocessor defines rather than the MSVC-compatibility defines).
Copied from llvm/llvm-project#150068