Subject: bug#55283: ‘tests/guix-shell-export-manifest.sh’ fails on aarch64-linux

From: Efraim Flashner <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 18:50:54 +0300

On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 05:40:28PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> Nice to have AArch64 support in (guix cpu)!
> 
> Efraim Flashner <[email-masked]> skribis:
> 
> > diff --git a/guix/cpu.scm b/guix/cpu.scm
> > index a44cd082f1..37ed6f0a18 100644
> > --- a/guix/cpu.scm
> > +++ b/guix/cpu.scm
> > @@ -62,31 +62,51 @@ (define (prefix? prefix)
> >        (lambda (port)
> >          (let loop ((vendor #f)
> >                     (family #f)
> > -                   (model #f))
> > +                   (model #f)
> > +                   (flags (list->set '())))
> 
> You can replace (list->set '()) by (set).
> 
> > +    ("aarch64"
> > +     ;; Transcribed from GCC's list of aarch64 processors in aarch64-cores.def
> > +     ;; What to do with big.LITTLE cores?
> > +     (match (cpu-vendor cpu)
> > +       ("0x41"
> 
> Is /proc/cpuinfo more or less guaranteed to return hex numbers like
> this?

I'm almost certain it is on aarch64. I don't have an armhf machine to
check with.

> >      (architecture
> > -     ;; TODO: AArch64.
> > -     architecture)))
> > +      ;; TODO: More architectures
> > +      (utsname:machine (uname)))))
> 
> We can return ‘architecture’ as is, no need to re-call ‘uname’.

That's what we had before and we got the error.

> I haven’t run the code but at first sight it LGTM!
> 
> (The bug reported at the beginning of this thread looks rather basic
> though; I’ll follow up on that.)
> 
> Thanks,
> Ludo’.

-- 
Efraim Flashner   <[email-masked]>   אפרים פלשנר
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D  14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted