From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pg1-x534.google.com (mail-pg1-x534.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::534]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 922EA38460B4 for ; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 22:24:17 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 922EA38460B4 Received: by mail-pg1-x534.google.com with SMTP id t11so7051379pgu.8 for ; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:24:17 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=m/BonC9C1QmKU0+68J9+MWDpJiqr/IVkOaTgpDwZing=; b=pKlThoNpaV1SrE1pnlaPdGDXjEhm5YxLvh/IZ1rlc0Tbkfz4g4Jt4JwcQM9uo30Lc8 wiQY6dcYRGBELOSERU7k4zuEfSIYuLSHxVV2nGp85DLRoqaaYhncFwry/rSZ+kcvTntH Q9gY4hxEH1e/ZJcrOhHe7p95G1KVquAb7DEPR/3x87qhHDXPC3Ojp7HNTzzYI6Ofoh0e cB6WCLQNcosffiP6/YC7Jbg5e4BszZLh7JZZ0V+3ZIlZxV5kQiNw0z1zrJi77cfQpuPs /+wOv6Xq9QbsyomnxYEz9juyY3ChhnnFCyApB8jRg8tFCxF4cs6rH8f8cIpNf6CRcupz 4ylA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532it2VXYkGQ/u7ncFRbTbyX6eFKXSD7M3IpB7VArvfDHz68NFG3 ucQxA+i0CbtbIH0rKqh4tZxOyw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxnFTV1FCEYbibKGBRvY4OLxEHfz3PzznILY0mQXVTwFOemxDfyuVFR6erttqN+nISYcCs7vQ== X-Received: by 2002:a62:e418:0:b029:1ed:bee1:f813 with SMTP id r24-20020a62e4180000b02901edbee1f813mr5261911pfh.55.1614378256436; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:24:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:8003:ddd2:ad00:cd5c:8cdc:82ca:93ba? ([2001:8003:ddd2:ad00:cd5c:8cdc:82ca:93ba]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d75sm8027455pfd.20.2021.02.26.14.24.13 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:24:16 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.3 \(3445.6.18\)) Subject: Re: apple silicon fortran From: Rosemary Mardling In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2021 09:24:11 +1100 Cc: James Secan , Jerry DeLisle , Thomas Koenig , Fortran List Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <203EFF28-F6B9-4DBA-8B70-863DE50A89EC@monash.edu> References: <941045F7-9782-408B-BF5A-015E2FAF246A@monash.edu> <7FCF49F0-EA95-44F1-B5B6-01393378783E@gmail.com> <1ED16F62-4E5F-4EC1-9CD6-3E5A59A6C415@googlemail.com> <291F2ED7-BFF4-4F8C-A902-62231FB75425@gmail.com> To: Iain Sandoe X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.6.18) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: fortran@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Fortran mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 22:24:19 -0000 Hi everyone, Still dreaming of buying a MacBook Air with the M1 chip, but still = worried I won=E2=80=99t be able to run my fortran codes on it. Just wondering if you have made progress with a fortran compiler for = this new machine? I sure appreciate all your help in January! Best wishes, Rosemary > On 10 Jan 2021, at 6:30 am, Iain Sandoe = wrote: >=20 > Hi Jim, >=20 > James Secan wrote: >>> On Jan 9, 2021, at 11:07 AM, Iain Sandoe via Fortran = wrote: >=20 >>> I am testing out the Rosetta 2 alternative (which is, AFAIU, a = binary-conversion done at install-time native on macOS). >>>=20 >>> Useful to have some fall-back solutions in the short-term, but a = native compiler is still the eventual objective. >>=20 >=20 >> I would think that running the compiler under Rosetta 2 would still = produce a binary that is not compatible with the M1 processor (would it = run on a Mac Intel box?). >=20 > Yes, that=E2=80=99s right - it would be an x86_64 compiler, running = via Rosetta on Arm64, producing X86_64 object ... >=20 >> Can you run the binary on M1 using Rosetta 2 again? >=20 > =E2=80=A6 it would seem to defeat some use-case if not - given that = the bootstrap succeeded, evidently yes (but perhaps using the JIT = mechanism, which might not perform so well).. >=20 >> And my admittedly-shallow understanding of Rosetta 2, isn=E2=80=99t = it supposed to generate a new binary the first time a code is run using = it, said new binary then being run directly in a subsequent invocation = of Rosetta2+userApp? >=20 > Actually, (from limited reading, and likely equally shallow = understaning), it seems that this operates two ways; a one-off when = something is installed (so that from then-on one is running native code, = with no translation phase). That=E2=80=99s different from the Rosetta 1 = (PowerPC=3D>X86). >=20 > The second mode is more akin to the Rosetta 1 case, a JIT that is run = as needed... >=20 >> I am interested to hear the results of your testing with Rosetta 2. >=20 > I bootstrapped x86_64-apple-darwin20 on aarch64-darwin20.3, and = currently running the Fortran testsuite - it=E2=80=99s not clear to me = if some of the issues (PIE and no-executable stack) will be sidestepped = or not. We shall see. >=20 > Iain >=20