2012/8/8, Carl Christensen <[email protected]>: > Hi, I built boinc for Linux (Debian) on the new Raspberry Pi device, which > is a very cheap (US $35) low-power computer with an ARM processor, that runs > Linux. We are looking to use these on the Quake-Catcher Network as cheap > "self contained" earthquake sensors. > > I don't know if it's worth maybe adding a boinc platform for this (I can > just edit the boinc client & server for our purposes)? > > armv6l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf
I think it's a great idea to make official BOINC platform names for ARM. However, it's harder than it may seem. There are lots of variations in ARM processor capabilities and ABIs. Simply as an example, here's the situation in Debian (I have no idea what happens in other distros). Debian has three different "ports" for ARM: - 'arm': For an old ABI and ARMv3(!) processors. Deprecated. - 'armel': Uses the new EABI, needs an ARMv4t processor. I think it uses soft-float, but in general the floating-point situation seems... complicated. - 'armhf': Uses and requires hardware-float everywhere. Needs ARMv7 CPU with Thumb-2. - The Raspberry Pi has an ARMv6 processor, so it won't run Debian armhf. There's an unofficial port called "Raspbian" made for the Raspberry Pi, needing ARMv6 but taking advantage of hardfloat. So, if we're going to add an official BOINC platform name(s) for Linux-ARM, we need to decide and document what ABI and what minimum ARM core it would require. Obviously an app can do runtime checks or even server-side app-planning to enable more features (like making an ARMv6-compatible app that can use new ARMv7 instructions and NEON if available), but a BOINC platform name should set a "baseline", especially when things are not backwards-compatible (like in an ABI change). -- Nicolás _______________________________________________ boinc_dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
