Skip to content

Add reference data for Apple MacBook Pro 2025 M5 on Tahoe#153

Open
sethrj wants to merge 1 commit into
archspec:masterfrom
sethrj:apple-m5
Open

Add reference data for Apple MacBook Pro 2025 M5 on Tahoe#153
sethrj wants to merge 1 commit into
archspec:masterfrom
sethrj:apple-m5

Conversation

@sethrj
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@sethrj sethrj commented May 8, 2026

$ cd tests/targets
$ sysctl -i hw -i machdep > darwin-tahoe-m5
$ system_profiler -json SPHardwareDataType | jq '.[][] | with_entries(select(.key | IN("machine_model","machine_name","model_number")))'
{
  "machine_model": "Mac17,2",
  "machine_name": "MacBook Pro",
  "model_number": "Z1KK0008ELL/A"
}
$ system_profiler -json SPSoftwareDataType | jq '.[][]["os_version"]'
"macOS 26.4.1 (25E253)"

```
$ sysctl -i hw -i machdep > darwin-tahoe-m5
$ system_profiler -json SPHardwareDataType | jq '.[][] | with_entries(select(.key | IN("machine_model","machine_name","model_number")))'
{
  "machine_model": "Mac17,2",
  "machine_name": "MacBook Pro",
  "model_number": "Z1KK0008ELL/A"
}
$ system_profiler -json SPSoftwareDataType | jq '.[][]["os_version"]'
"macOS 26.4.1 (25E253)"
```
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@alalazo alalazo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you add an entry for m5 in microarchitectures.json too?

@alalazo alalazo self-assigned this May 11, 2026
@alalazo alalazo added the enhancement New feature or request label May 11, 2026
@sethrj
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

sethrj commented May 11, 2026

@alalazo As of now, it seems like there are zero instruction set differences (except in I suppose cache sizes/rates) between M4 and M5: I keep revisiting archspec/archspec#216 (comment) which was an earlier attempt at #231 .

Since there are no (currently known?) differences in microoptimizations, it seems like everything built for M5 should work with M4 and vice versa, so I don't know whether it's better to leave them as exactly the same target or not.

@alalazo
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

alalazo commented May 11, 2026

Ok, I was wondering whether to include this PR in the next release of archspec (likely to be done this week). I think we can defer the discussion and leave this out atm.

@sethrj
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

sethrj commented May 11, 2026

I think it could be good to include in the testing, as it might make clearer that we're identifying the M5 as an M4.

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

Labels

enhancement New feature or request

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants