Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

x/build: add a windows/arm builder using a windows/arm64 host #57960

Open
qmuntal opened this issue Jan 23, 2023 · 4 comments
Open

x/build: add a windows/arm builder using a windows/arm64 host #57960

qmuntal opened this issue Jan 23, 2023 · 4 comments
Labels
arch-arm Issues solely affecting the 32-bit arm architecture. Builders x/build issues (builders, bots, dashboards) NeedsFix The path to resolution is known, but the work has not been done. OS-Windows
Milestone

Comments

@qmuntal
Copy link
Contributor

qmuntal commented Jan 23, 2023

@zx2c4 windows/arm builder has been missing for a long time, although it still appears on the build dashboard.

I've been able to compile a windows/arm Go toolchain and run go tool dist test using a Windows ARM64 host by setting GOHOSTARCH=arm and GOARCH=arm. I believe that we could follow the same approach with the host-windows11-arm64-azure host (recently added as part of #53541), using it to run a windows/arm builder.

@heschi @thanm

@qmuntal qmuntal added OS-Windows Builders x/build issues (builders, bots, dashboards) arch-arm Issues solely affecting the 32-bit arm architecture. labels Jan 23, 2023
@gopherbot gopherbot added this to the Unreleased milestone Jan 23, 2023
@bcmills bcmills added the NeedsFix The path to resolution is known, but the work has not been done. label Jan 23, 2023
@bcmills
Copy link
Member

bcmills commented Jan 23, 2023

(CC @golang/windows)

@heschi
Copy link
Contributor

heschi commented Jan 23, 2023

GCP's ARM64 hosts can't run ARM binaries in our experience -- are you confident that Azure's can?

I think this mostly comes down to a question of resources and spending. We don't currently have enough budget to run more builders. We've gone a long, long time without windows-arm, so it's not easy for me to see a need. Can someone explain the benefit?

@qmuntal
Copy link
Contributor Author

qmuntal commented Jan 23, 2023

GCP's ARM64 hosts can't run ARM binaries in our experience -- are you confident that Azure's can?

Haven't really tried that on Azure, but I have a Windows ARM64 dev box that is surprisingly happy to run ARM binaries.

I think this mostly comes down to a question of resources and spending. We don't currently have enough budget to run more builders. We've gone a long, long time without windows-arm, so it's not easy for me to see a need. Can someone explain the benefit?

I'm not particularly interested on the windows/arm port. My main motivation to submit this idea is to have a safety net when touching the Go runtime internals for Windows that affects all its supported architectures. Having said this, if you are running short on resources I would rather have them expended on windows/arm64. I can still test that I don't break anything crosscompiling from my arm64 dev box.

@bcmills
Copy link
Member

bcmills commented Jan 24, 2023

We've gone a long, long time without windows-arm, so it's not easy for me to see a need. Can someone explain the benefit?

I don't have an opinion of the benefit of maintaining the windows/arm port, but I do want to point out an inconsistency: given that our porting policy requires each port to have a running builder, and that we currently do not have one for windows/arm, if we decline to add a builder we should add it to the list of broken ports.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
arch-arm Issues solely affecting the 32-bit arm architecture. Builders x/build issues (builders, bots, dashboards) NeedsFix The path to resolution is known, but the work has not been done. OS-Windows
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants