[fedora-arm] Re: 48-bit support in F26?

[Jeremy Linton]

Hi,
On 09/14/2016 02:55 PM, Jon Masters wrote:

Hi Jeremy, all,


(trimming)


Perhaps Jeremy can update us on the status, and then he and others can
help drive this forward (someone should nominate themselves as the ring
leader too). I spoke with Cavium earlier today, and I know they'll be
keen to help. I know Qualcomm had expressed interest during our IRC
meetings in helping out. To that end, I'm copying at least those I know
so far who are interested here.


(this is the short version, even so, it got really long) 

Right now, there are posted patches for 1.8.5, 17, 24 and 38 in the 
fedora mozjs defects 1242326, 1375305, 1375547. The 17, 24 and 38 
versions are fairly straightforward backports of the upstream mmap patch 
which maintains the mozjs ABI. The dependent packages should not need to 
be rebuilt. The 1.8.5 is based on an earlier patch and moves the tagging 
bits higher in the word and will require a further work to go beyond 
48-bit. That means that all js185 packages will need to be rebuilt 
against it. Doing it this way helps to solve some problems with couchdb.


There are public patches to move polkit (fedora bug #1375368, polkit bug 
#74592) to mozjs24 
(https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/polkit-devel/2016-August/000503.html). 
That removes the mozjs17 dependency in fedora.


There are also public patches for libproxy 
https://github.com/libproxy/libproxy/pull/36, and pacrunner 
https://lists.01.org/pipermail/connman/2016-September/020902.html. To 
get them off js185.


Further, there is another effort to move 0ad off mozjs31 to mozj38. 
http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/3708


This leaves couchdb, elinks, erlang, freewrl/libEIA, mediatomb and 
plowshare on js185.


At the moment, as far as mozjs is concerned I think its mostly working. 
The remaining js185 projects should work, but should have further 
attention. Erlang and freewrl are not trivial, and while it appears that 
freewrl was moving towards duktape, it doesn't actually appear to be 
working at the moment.


There is also a similar mess for lua, for which upstream version 2.1 has 
patches, but those need investigation and backporting for nginx/etc on 
fedora. Frankly, I'm trying to clear off my small piece of mozjs  before 
jumping into the lua bucket. If someone wants to grab that portion they 
are welcome to it.


I can provide more detail about specifics in mozjs if anyone is 
interested. My general goal right now is to consolidate on mozjs24 and 
mozjs38. If once that happens I will consider it done. If anyone decides 
to grab one of the projects let me know, I have partial (not yet 100% 
functional) reworks for a couple of them. Further, it should be noted 
that at least mozjs24 has regression failures on fedora/aarch64 at the 
moment. Those failures are not dependent on 48-bit.




js185:
couchdb-0:1.6.1-16.fc25.x86_64
elinks-0:0.12-0.48.pre6.fc24.x86_64
erlang-js-0:1.3.0-7.fc25.x86_64
freewrl-0:3.0.0-1.fc25.x86_64
js-devel-1:1.8.5-25.fc25.i686
js-devel-1:1.8.5-25.fc25.x86_64
libEAI-0:3.0.0-1.fc25.x86_64
libproxy-mozjs-0:0.4.12-4.fc25.x86_64
mediatomb-0:0.12.1-38.fc25.20120403gitb66dc1.x86_64
pacrunner-0:0.7-7.fc24.x86_64
plowshare-0:2.0.1-3.fc24.noarch


mozjs17:
mozjs17-devel-0:17.0.0-15.fc25.i686
mozjs17-devel-0:17.0.0-15.fc25.x86_64
polkit-0:0.113-5.fc24.x86_64

mozjs24:
cinnamon-0:3.0.6-1.fc25.x86_64
cjs-1:3.0.1-1.fc25.i686
cjs-1:3.0.1-1.fc25.x86_64
cjs-tests-1:3.0.1-1.fc25.x86_64
gjs-0:1.45.4-1.fc25.i686
gjs-0:1.45.4-1.fc25.x86_64
gjs-tests-0:1.45.4-1.fc25.x86_64
gnome-shell-0:3.21.4-1.fc25.x86_64
mozjs24-devel-0:24.2.0-8.fc24.i686
mozjs24-devel-0:24.2.0-8.fc24.x86_64

mozjs31:
0ad-0:0.0.20-4.fc25.x86_64 (in progress to 38

mozjs38:
mongodb-0:3.2.7-1.fc25.x86_64
mongodb-server-0:3.2.7-1.fc25.x86_64
mozjs38-devel-0:38.2.1-8.fc25.i686
mozjs38-devel-0:38.2.1-8.fc25

mozjs45:
(nothing at the moment, just in rawhide)
___
arm mailing list
arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/arm@lists.fedoraproject.org

[fedora-arm] Re: 48-bit support in F26?

[Jon Masters]

Great - that was my preference just didn't want to overkill it. But this sounds 
like good test run of doing the process the right way...

-- 
Computer Architect | Sent from my 64-bit #ARM Powered phone

> On Sep 14, 2016, at 17:13, Josh Boyer  wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Jon Masters  wrote:
>> Hi Jeremy, all,
>> 
>> I was just catching up with some folks and we discussed the status of
>> 48-bit VA support. It seems to me that it would make most sense to have
>> an official coordination effort between those vendors/community members
>> who are interested, to ensure that they help with the necessary package
>> updates ahead of the kernel, and work with a test kernel to identify any
>> additional packages or issues that need resolving. I believe it would
>> make most sense to have a Fedora feature page (or something less grand,
>> but similar in concept) tracking this for F26, with the deps.
> 
> I would very much advocate for the full Feature page.  It will get the
> change the appropriate attention technically, and it will raise
> awareness of Aarch64 within Fedora from a general sense.
> 
> josh
___
arm mailing list
arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/arm@lists.fedoraproject.org

[fedora-arm] Re: 48-bit support in F26?

[Josh Boyer]

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Jon Masters  wrote:
> Hi Jeremy, all,
>
> I was just catching up with some folks and we discussed the status of
> 48-bit VA support. It seems to me that it would make most sense to have
> an official coordination effort between those vendors/community members
> who are interested, to ensure that they help with the necessary package
> updates ahead of the kernel, and work with a test kernel to identify any
> additional packages or issues that need resolving. I believe it would
> make most sense to have a Fedora feature page (or something less grand,
> but similar in concept) tracking this for F26, with the deps.

I would very much advocate for the full Feature page.  It will get the
change the appropriate attention technically, and it will raise
awareness of Aarch64 within Fedora from a general sense.

josh
___
arm mailing list
arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/arm@lists.fedoraproject.org

[fedora-arm] 48-bit support in F26?

[Jon Masters]

Hi Jeremy, all,

I was just catching up with some folks and we discussed the status of
48-bit VA support. It seems to me that it would make most sense to have
an official coordination effort between those vendors/community members
who are interested, to ensure that they help with the necessary package
updates ahead of the kernel, and work with a test kernel to identify any
additional packages or issues that need resolving. I believe it would
make most sense to have a Fedora feature page (or something less grand,
but similar in concept) tracking this for F26, with the deps.

Perhaps Jeremy can update us on the status, and then he and others can
help drive this forward (someone should nominate themselves as the ring
leader too). I spoke with Cavium earlier today, and I know they'll be
keen to help. I know Qualcomm had expressed interest during our IRC
meetings in helping out. To that end, I'm copying at least those I know
so far who are interested here.

Jon.

-- 
Computer Architect | Sent from my Fedora powered laptop
___
arm mailing list
arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/arm@lists.fedoraproject.org

[fedora-arm] Re: F23 aarch64 support for HiKey and Dragonboard?

[William Cohen]

On 09/14/2016 01:00 PM, Ziqian SUN(zsun) wrote:
> Sorry for reply on ancient mail.
> I see that neither HiKey nor DragonBoard is marked in the wiki[1]. So I want 
> to know what's the support status of Hikey Board?
> 
> And I see usually we ship ISO for aarch64, while Hikey and Dragon Board 
> usually needs a img. So if supported, any hints on how I can install it on my 
> Hikey (or even, how can I convert the ISO to a img file)?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/AArch64/F24/Installation

Hi,

The dragonboard uses a different bootloader (little kernel) than was is 
expected for Fedora aarch64 installation.  There is a Fedora 23 remix that runs 
off of a sd card for the dragonboard 410c:

https://dmarlin.fedorapeople.org/fedora-arm/aarch64/README.Linaro-F23-remix-lxde

-Will


> 
> On 09/25/2015 09:51 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Clive Messer  
>> wrote:
>>> Peter,
>>>
>>> Is F23 aarch64 supporting either HiKey or Dragonboard?
>>
>> HiKey should boot with 4.2 (what's in F-23) with MMC, usb looks
>> terrible which isn't particularly useful, in theory wireless is
>> upstream but I've not had a chance to get that far as I'm awaiting a
>> decent UART [1] for easy debug of the board, at the moment I've not
>> enabled dragonboard (QCOM) but it's on my list for next week, it's
>> confirmed that HDMI has issues but everything else should work. The
>> QCom stuff has weird bootloaders (not uboot or uEFI) so YMMV.
>>
>> [1] 
>> http://www.seeedstudio.com/depot/96Boards-UART-p-2525.html?ref=newInBazaar
>> ___
>> arm mailing list
>> arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
>>
> 
___
arm mailing list
arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/arm@lists.fedoraproject.org

[fedora-arm] Re: F23 aarch64 support for HiKey and Dragonboard?

[Ziqian SUN(zsun)]

Sorry for reply on ancient mail.
I see that neither HiKey nor DragonBoard is marked in the wiki[1]. So I 
want to know what's the support status of Hikey Board?


And I see usually we ship ISO for aarch64, while Hikey and Dragon Board 
usually needs a img. So if supported, any hints on how I can install it 
on my Hikey (or even, how can I convert the ISO to a img file)?


Thanks.

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/AArch64/F24/Installation

On 09/25/2015 09:51 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Clive Messer  wrote:

Peter,

Is F23 aarch64 supporting either HiKey or Dragonboard?


HiKey should boot with 4.2 (what's in F-23) with MMC, usb looks
terrible which isn't particularly useful, in theory wireless is
upstream but I've not had a chance to get that far as I'm awaiting a
decent UART [1] for easy debug of the board, at the moment I've not
enabled dragonboard (QCOM) but it's on my list for next week, it's
confirmed that HDMI has issues but everything else should work. The
QCom stuff has weird bootloaders (not uboot or uEFI) so YMMV.

[1] http://www.seeedstudio.com/depot/96Boards-UART-p-2525.html?ref=newInBazaar
___
arm mailing list
arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm



--
Ziqian SUN
z...@fedoraproject.org
zsun in #fedora-zh #openshift on freenode.net
___
arm mailing list
arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/arm@lists.fedoraproject.org