Closed ilya-lavrenov closed 1 year ago
Hi @ilya-lavrenov
Apologies for the confusion, there is no difference as both binaries are built for the same architecture v8.2-a
and are both aarch64
. The files using armv8.2-a
should really be arm64-v8.2-a
. Moving forward any new binaries will use the arm64
prefix.
Hope this helps.
Hi @morgolock
Does it mean a list of architectures here also needs to be update to avoid confusion ?
Currently, it also mixes arm64-v8.2-a
and armv8.2-a
.
Hi @ilya-lavrenov
The option -march=arm64-v8.2-a
builds a 64 bit binary.
The intention with the option -march=armv8.2-a
is to let the user to specify the estate
and allow 32 bit builds when using arch=armv8.2-a estate=32
The prebuilt binaries in the release for armv8.2-a
should have used the arm64
prefix because they are all aarch64
binaries.
Hope this helps.
arch=armv8.2-a estate=32
Could you please elaborate more or point to external documents where it's written why it can be useful? In what cases should I use this approach? I (maybe mistakenly) supposed that armv8 is always 64bits
Thanks, Ilya.
Hi @ilya-lavrenov
Could you please elaborate more or point to external documents where it's written why it can be useful?
It depends on the specific use case, one benefit of an aarch32
binary is the reduced binary size since the instruction set is 32 bit.
I (maybe mistakenly) supposed that armv8 is always 64bits
You can build armv8a
for 32 bit. For more information see:
Hope this helps.
See https://github.com/ARM-software/ComputeLibrary/releases/tag/v23.02.1