Skip to content

build: support armv81 arch in Makefile#776

Open
ztechenbo wants to merge 1 commit intosipeed:mainfrom
ztechenbo:main
Open

build: support armv81 arch in Makefile#776
ztechenbo wants to merge 1 commit intosipeed:mainfrom
ztechenbo:main

Conversation

@ztechenbo
Copy link

build: support armv81 arch detection in Makefile

📝 Description

This PR updates the Makefile Linux architecture detection to recognize armv81 and map it to arm64, so builds work correctly on systems reporting uname -m = armv81.

🗣️ Type of Change

  • 🐞 Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • ✨ New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • 📖 Documentation update
  • ⚡ Code refactoring (no functional changes, no api changes)

🤖 AI Code Generation

  • 🤖 Fully AI-generated (100% AI, 0% Human)
  • 🛠️ Mostly AI-generated (AI draft, Human verified/modified)
  • 👨‍💻 Mostly Human-written (Human lead, AI assisted or none)

🔗 Related Issue

N/A

📚 Technical Context (Skip for Docs)

  • Reference URL: N/A
  • Reasoning: Some environments report uname -m as armv81. Without this mapping, the build target arch may be mis-detected, leading to incorrect output naming/packaging. This change treats armv81 as arm64.

🧪 Test Environment

  • Hardware: N/A
  • OS: Linux
  • Model/Provider: N/A
  • Channels: N/A

📸 Evidence (Optional)

Click to view Logs/Screenshots

Built successfully after updating arch detection for armv81.

☑️ Checklist

  • My code/docs follow the style of this project.
  • I have performed a self-review of my own changes.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.

Copy link

@nikolasdehor nikolasdehor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Straightforward 2-line Makefile change to map armv81 to arm64. Follows the existing pattern for aarch64. LGTM.

One thought: there are also armv8l variants (lowercase L) reported by some kernels (e.g., 32-bit userspace on 64-bit ARM). If the goal is broad ARMv8 coverage, that might be worth adding too, but that can be a separate PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants