Re: [PATCH] Add native windows on arm64 support

On 2024-01-30 Tu 17:54, Dave Cramer wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 4:56 PM Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> 
> wrote:
>
>
>     On 2024-01-30 Tu 09:50, Dave Cramer wrote:
>>
>>
>>     On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 at 08:38, Andrew Dunstan
>>     <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>         On 2024-01-29 Mo 11:20, Dave Cramer wrote:
>>>
>>>         Dave Cramer
>>>         www.postgres.rocks <http://www.postgres.rocks>
>>>
>>>
>>>         On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 at 11:16, Andrew Dunstan
>>>         <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>             On 2024-01-26 Fr 09:18, Dave Cramer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>             On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 at 07:36, Andrew Dunstan
>>>>             <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>                 On 2024-01-25 Th 20:32, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>>>                 > On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 04:52:30PM -0500, Dave
>>>>                 Cramer wrote:
>>>>                 >> On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 at 16:32, Andrew Dunstan
>>>>                 <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>>>>                 >>> On 2024-01-25 Th 16:17, Dave Cramer wrote:
>>>>                 >>> Yeah, I think the default Developer Command
>>>>                 Prompt for VS2022 is set up
>>>>                 >>> for x86 builds. AIUI you should start by
>>>>                 executing "vcvarsall x64_arm64".
>>>>                 >> Yup, now I'm in the same state you are
>>>>                 > Wait a minute here. Based on [1], x64_arm64 means
>>>>                 you can use a x64
>>>>                 > host and you'll be able to produce ARM64 builds,
>>>>                 still these will not
>>>>                 > be able to run on the host where they were built.
>>>>                 How much of the
>>>>                 > patch posted upthread is required to produce such
>>>>                 builds?  Basically
>>>>                 > everything from it, I guess, so as build
>>>>                 dependencies can be
>>>>                 > satisfied?
>>>>                 >
>>>>                 > [1]:
>>>>                 https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/build/building-on-the-command-line?view=msvc-170
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>                 If you look at the table here x86 and x64 are the
>>>>                 only supported host
>>>>                 architectures. But that's OK, the x64 binaries will
>>>>                 run on arm64 (W11
>>>>                 ARM64 has x64 emulation builtin). If that didn't
>>>>                 work Dave and I would
>>>>                 not have got as far as we have. But you want the
>>>>                 x64_arm64 argument to
>>>>                 vcvarsall so you will get ARM64 output.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>             I've rebuilt it using x64_arm64 and with the attached
>>>>             (very naive patch) and I still get an x64 binary :(
>>>
>>>
>>>             With this patch I still get a build error, but it's
>>>             different :-)
>>>
>>>
>>>             [1406/2088] "link" @src/backend/postgres.exe.rsp
>>>             FAILED: src/backend/postgres.exe src/backend/postgres.pdb
>>>             "link" @src/backend/postgres.exe.rsp
>>>                Creating library src\backend\postgres.exe.lib
>>>
>>>             storage_lmgr_s_lock.c.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved
>>>             external symbol spin_delay referenced in function
>>>             perform_spin_delay
>>>
>>>             src\backend\postgres.exe : fatal error LNK1120: 1
>>>             unresolved externals
>>>
>>>
>>>         Did you add the latest lock.patch ?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>         I'm a bit confused about exactly what needs to be applied.
>>         Can you supply a complete patch to be applied to a pristine
>>         checkout that will let me build?
>>
>>
>>         cheers
>>
>>
>>     See attached.
>>
>>
>
>     No, that is what is giving me the error shown above (just tried
>     again to be certain). And it's not surprising, as patch 2 #ifdef's
>     out the definition of spin_delay().
>
>     If you can get a complete build with these patches then I suspect
>     you're not doing a proper ARM64 build.
>
>
> Okay I will look when I get home in a week


I made some progress. The attached is mostly taken from 
<https://postgr.es/m/dbee741f-b9b7-a0d5-1b1b-f9b532bb6f56@linaro.org>

With it applied I was able to get a successful build using the buildfarm 
client. However, there are access violations when running some tests, so 
there is still some work to do, apparently.


cheers


andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB:https://www.enterprisedb.com