build: add basic arm64 support

[bnoordhuis]

This commit adds basic arm64 support to the build. Building the bundled
openssl is disabled pending an upgrade to openssl 1.2. The currently
bundled version has some hand-rolled assembly that is 32 bits only.

The first commit is #1027.

It's not all roses but at least it compiles now.

R=@rvagg, /cc @shigeki@silverwind

[rvagg]

Hah! I knew you couldn't resist a challenge if I put that armv8 slave there. Very nice work. Keen to see the openssl-1.2 issues sorted out.

Also, I've been wondering if we should go with the "aarch64" moniker since that appears to be the emerging name for this? "arm64" makes more sense to me but I can't say I've seen that used anywhere else.

[silverwind]

I'm curious, what hardware are you testing this on?

[rvagg]

http://www.linaro.org/leg/servercluster/

ARM have been lending a hand, they are keen to help this become a viable platform for ARMv8 servers. See the note in the last update: https://medium.com/node-js-javascript/io-js-week-of-february-17th-9422a589302a

[bnoordhuis]

Also, I've been wondering if we should go with the "aarch64" moniker since that appears to be the emerging name for this? "arm64" makes more sense to me but I can't say I've seen that used anywhere else.

aarch64 is what shows up in the gcc triplet but I think in most other places it's called arm64. Off the top of my head: mainline linux, freebsd, debian, ubuntu and V8 itself, of course.

[rvagg]

This from ARM:

ARMv8 architecture which introduces a 64-bit execution mode (known as AARCH64) and maintains backwards compatibility with ARMv7 32-bit code (via a 32-bit execution mode called AARCH32).

[jbergstroem]

Perhaps note somewhere during configure phase that openssl support won't be build if you don't use a shared library?

[silverwind]

arm64 seems to be the slightly more popular name, while aarch64 is technically more correct. My gut says call it arm64 for less confusion.

[bnoordhuis]

@jbergstroem Added warning, PTAL.

[jbergstroem]

@bnoordhuis LGTM

[bnoordhuis]

@jbergstroem Thanks! @rvagg Can I get a LGTM?

[rvagg]

yes, you can get one: LGTM

[shigeki]

I'm okay to build without SSL on arm64 for now, but I'm curious that building with --openssl-no-asm on arm64 in the current iojs also leads to failures? I would like someone to try it because it helps my future work.

[shigeki]

@rvagg Please run ci of https://github.com/shigeki/io.js/tree/arm64_no_asm to check if openssl_no_asm works well on arm64 .

[rvagg]

https://jenkins-iojs.nodesource.com/job/iojs+any-pr+multi/235/

[shigeki]

@rvagg Thanks. Building on arm64 successful but several tests are failed with timeout due to spawnSync . Is this know issue?

[rvagg]

@shigeki I don't believe so. See the armv7 machine which is mostly blue these days and I think the armv8 box is faster than the armv7 one.

[shigeki]

@rvaggtest-child-process-spawnsync was failed with TIMEOUT even in the previous job of https://jenkins-iojs.nodesource.com/job/iojs+any-pr+multi/nodes=iojs-armv8-ubuntu1404/234/console . Several tls tests use openssl-cli command with spawnSync so they all were failed with TIMEOUT. I think there is something wrong with spawnSync on arm64.

[rvagg]

that's firmly in @bnoordhuis's wheelhouse then

[shigeki]

@rvagg I've just submitted a new issue of #1035 .