arm February 2011

arm@lists.fedoraproject.org

21 participants
11 discussions

Fedora ARM 12 on IGEPv2 (Beagle Board clone)
by Matthew Wilson 01 Jan '16

01 Jan '16

Hi all, I would like to introduce myself to the group. I have recently received an IGEPv2 board [1], which is based on the Beagle Board, but with wifi, bluetooth, ethernet, and more RAM. I'm still at the "wow, it's tiny and it runs Linux" stage. I should get a bit more time over the next month and Christmas to play around properly with it. I'm new to embedded development, but neither new to Linux nor ARM (writing my first ARM assembly some 15 years ago). However, for the past 6 years I've not even built a Linux kernel, preferring to use the default kernel in Fedora for simplicity :) Firstly, a thank you to those involved in Fedora ARM for getting it to this stage. If I get the time, I'd really like to contribute some (probably small) effort to help get Fedora ARM working well on the IGEPv2 and Beagle Board. As I progress, I'd like to know what I can do to help. In the meantime, I have some questions. Apologies in advance if these seem simple. 1) There are various different kernels from different sources. I'm used to there being a small set of "right" kernels (that is, Fedora's idea of "right") for x86. I fully appreciate that different ARM-based boards are quite different in capabilities (like different instruction set variants). a) Is there likely to be some standardised vanilla Fedora ARM kernel source? (Or is that simply the source RPM available for Fedora?) Then patches /could/ be offered for the more common systems (e.g. Beagle Board & clones, SheevaPlug). b) Would it then make sense to offer these as pre-built RPMs for common systems? c) Is there any guidance on which version is good to use as a base? I've seen quite different kernel versions being used (from 2.6.27 to 2.6.31). 2) I understand a little bit about the different calling conventions, FP differences (e.g. soft FPU versus VFP), and instruction set differences (v5 versus v7). a) Can the kernel can be safely built with a different instruction set targeted? (I know there are different optimisation options passed to GCC. Apologies if this seems a bit newbie-ish.) b) For FP-heavy programs (e.g. ogg encoding), is it possible to build the packages with VFP/NEON but still get them to work in a soft FPU system? I'd imagine any call to an external library would have to somehow be defined to use a different calling standard. 3) There seem to be some missing dependencies in the packages in the current Fedora ARM repository. For example, emacs is requiring libotf, which doesn't seem to be there in the repository. And likewise with the xorg-x11-font* packages needing ttmkdir. I'm confused as to how the RPM could have been successfully built without it. What am I missing? 4) I see there has been some discussion over unaligned data access. (Oh, I remember that from the ARM2 days.) It seems as if the Cortex-A8 cores allow unaligned data access when set up to do so [2]. Does this, in any way, help with the compatibility of packages targetting Cortex-A8? 5) I've managed to get various source packages missing from the Fedora ARM repositories to compile successfully (natively). I guess there is a reason why there are not in the repos right now -- is that reason down to time and priorities, or is there some blocking bugs with many of these packages? I look forward to being able to contribute something back into Fedora! Kind regards, Matthew [1] http://www.igep-platform.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4… [2] http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.ddi0344j/Beihgi…

11 15

Fedora 13 ARM Beta Release
by Paul Whalen 16 Mar '11

16 Mar '11

The Fedora 13 ARM Beta is now available for download. There are still a number of packages that haven’t been built for ARM due to build failures or missing dependencies. We’re a little behind the primary architectures so we have the ability to look at later releases to see if these failures have been fixed – thankfully a large number include support for ARM. Because of this we expect that with Fedora 14 and 15 we will be closer in line with the primary architectures. A new root file system is available for download - http://scotland.proximity.on.ca/fedora-arm/beta/f13/rootfs-f13-beta-2011-02… The password for the root account is “fedoraarm”. Instructions for using the root file system can be found at - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/Using The Fedora 13 ARM repository is temporarily located at – http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/mash/beta/f13-arm-2011-02-21/f13-arm/arm/… A comparision of the packages included in this beta release with the versions included in the primary 32-bit architecture (i686) - http://hongkong.proximity.on.ca/f13-arm-beta1/ The Fedora 13 ARM Beta release notes - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/F13-ARM-Beta1 We will now be working to get the remaining packages in Fedora 13 built, then move on to updates and Fedora 14. Enjoy, Paul Whalen http://paulfedora.wordpress.com

6 8

missing kernel rpm causing troubles
by Dan Horák 02 Mar '11

02 Mar '11

Looks like the missing kernel rpm is starting to cause troubles. I'm using common kernel and initramfs to provide support for the Kirkwood based devices like Sheevaplug or the QNAPs and thus need dracut to create the initramfs. And installing dracut now fails with [root@fedora-arm ~]# LANG=C yum install dracut ... --> Running transaction check ---> Package libdrm.armv5tel 0:2.4.20-1.fc13 set to be updated --> Processing Dependency: kernel >= 2.6.29.1-52.fc11 for package: libdrm-2.4.20-1.fc13.armv5tel ---> Package sgpio.armv5tel 0:1.2.0.10-4.fc12 set to be updated --> Finished Dependency Resolution Error: Package: libdrm-2.4.20-1.fc13.armv5tel (fedora) Requires: kernel >= 2.6.29.1-52.fc11 So the options are - prepare a real kernel rpm (even when it shouldn't be much useful), prepare a fake kernel package (containing Provides: kernel=V-R only) or something else. And I've chosen the fake the kernel method for now, see attachments. Dan

7 7

Preconfigured ARM VM available for testing on PCs
by Chris Tyler 01 Mar '11

01 Mar '11

I've packaged up a preconfigured ARM VM for easy testing of Fedora-ARM on a PC. From my blog post[0]: --- http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/248-.html The Fedora ARM secondary architecture project[1] reached a significant milestone last week with Paul's announcement of the beta 1 release[2]. Interested in ARM but lacking ARM hardware? Not a problem! Fedora includes support for ARM virtual machines, and I'm packaged up a preconfigured ARM VM for your convenience: * ARM virtual machine package: http://scotland.proximity.on.ca/arm/armvm/noarch/armvm-f13beta1-15.fc13.noa… * Repo config for staying up-to-date on ARM VM releases: http://scotland.proximity.on.ca/arm/armvm/noarch/armvm-release-1-1.fc13.noa… The armvm package will install a preconfigured ARM virtual machine named "f13-arm-beta1" with a 2GB image and a 128MB memory footprint. Since x86_64 processors don't provide hardware support for ARM processor virtualization, the ARM VM will run slowly compared to i386/x86_64 VMs, but the performance should be tolerable on most machines (Atom netbooks excepted). You can manage the VM with virsh or virt-manager. Enjoy! (Please don't forget that both the Fedora ARM beta release and the armvm package are very definitely at the pre-release/beta stage of maturity. In particular, updating the armvm package will REPLACE your arm VM with a new image - beware!). [0] http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/248-.html [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM [2] http://paulfedora.wordpress.com/2011/02/23/fedora-13-arm-beta-release/ -- Chris

3 2

Kernel panic attempting to run Fedora 13 beta in beagleboard xm
by Ismael Schinca 27 Feb '11

27 Feb '11

Hello everyone, I tried installing the Fedora 13 beta in the Beagleboard xm board using these instructions: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/BeagleBoardxMSDCard with the latest kernel and modules from: http://www.angstrom-distribution.org/demo/beagleboard/ The board boots but I receive the following kernel panic during start up: Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill init! Here's the last few output lines from the serial port before this message: [ 14.928527] Console: switching to colour frame buffer device 80x30 [ 14.951416] regulator_init_complete: incomplete constraint s, leaving VAUX3 on [ 14.958923] regulator_init_complete: incomplete constraints, leaving VDAC on [ 14.966552] omap_vout omap_vout: probed for an unknown device [ 14.972839] Waiting for root device /dev/mmcblk0p2... [ 14.978485] usb 2-2: New USB device found, idVendor=0424, idProduct=9514 [ 14.986145] usb 2-2: New USB device strings: Mfr=0, Product=0, SerialNumber=0 [ 14.995910] hub 2-2:1.0: USB hub found [ 14.999847] hub 2-2:1.0: 5 ports detected [ 15.086975] mmc0: new high speed SDHC card at address 1234 [ 15.092926] mmcblk0: mmc0:1234 SA04G 3.67 GiB [ 15.097778] mmcblk0: p1 p2 [ 15.203521] kjournald starting. Commit interval 5 seconds [ 15.213500] EXT3-fs (mmcblk0p2): using internal journal [ 15.218811] EXT3-fs (mmcblk0p2): recovery complete [ 15.223724] EXT3-fs (mmcblk0p2): mounted filesystem with writeback data mode [ 15.230926] VFS: Mounted root (ext3 filesystem) on device 179:2. [ 15.241882] devtmpfs: mounted [ 15.244964] Freeing init memory: 204K [ 15.288787] Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill init! Please let me know if you have any suggestions or need any additional information. Thanks! Regards, Ismael -- Ismael Schinca Centro Ceibal - Depto. Técnico - I+D Avda. Italia 6201 - Edificio Los Ceibos Montevideo - Uruguay. Tel.: 2601 57 73 Int. 2232

3 2

OpenSSL and cryptodev
by Gordan Bobic 23 Feb '11

23 Feb '11

Is there any particular reason why cryptodev.h is missing from openssl-1.0.0-1.fc13.src.rpm ? -DHAVE_CRYPTODEV should really become a default, at least on ARMs, since most of them seem to have some form of hardware crypto acceleration (e.g. Marvell ARMs such as what is in the SheevaPlug have hardware offload engine for SHA1 and AES.) Gordan

1 2

debuginfo packages for fedora-arm-koji
by Gordan Bobic 23 Feb '11

23 Feb '11

Can anybody point me in the direction of debuginfo packages for the fedora-arm-koji repository? I'm trying to get some backtraces for bug reporting but there debuginfos seem to be missing. TIA. Gordan

2 5

Problem in loading kernel
by Khosro Taraghi 15 Feb '11

15 Feb '11

Hello Everybody, I have a beagleboard Rev C4 and when I try to load the kernel from memory with bootm command, it shows me an error in the middle of loading kernel. This is the error message: Waiting 1sec before mounting root device... mmc0: new high speed SD card at address b368 mmcblk0: mmc0:b368 5 3.83 GiB mmcblk0: p1 VFS: Cannot open root device "b302" or unknown-block(179,2) Please append a correct "root=" boot option; here are the available partitions: 1f00 512 mtdblock0 (driver?) 1f01 1920 mtdblock1 (driver?) 1f02 128 mtdblock2 (driver?) 1f03 4096 mtdblock3 (driver?) 1f04 255488 mtdblock4 (driver?) b300 4020224 mmcblk0 driver: mmcblk b301 4016128 mmcblk0p1 Kernel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on unknown-block(179,2) I changed some environment variables to get result, but it failed with same error. Could you please help me if you have any idea. Thanks a lot in advance. Regards, Khosro Taraghi CTY student at Seneca

5 5

Khosro Taraghi
by Khosro Taraghi 09 Feb '11

09 Feb '11

Hello Everyone, I am a student at Seneca college and new participant in the Fedora Project community. Now, I am working on RPM Kernels on Fedora ARM and looking for someone that can help me if I have any question. I really appreciate from everyone for your time and consideration. Best Regards, Khosro Taraghi

2 1

1ghz ARM Laptop (12in 1280x800 LCD)
by lkcl . 09 Feb '11

09 Feb '11

folks, hi, i'm contacting people on all of the ARM linux distribution lists to find out if anyone is interested in bringing about the creation of a decent, useful and useable ARM-based Laptop. i've been researching CPUs and how to go about this with a minimum of risk and cost, learning from the experiences of the openpandora for example. all of the enquiries that i've made, for about a year, all point towards a minimum spec of at least a 1ghz CPU, 1gb of RAM and a 12in screen (below those specs is too little, and above them is too costly). does such a machine exist? in one word: no. there are plenty of machines with 1024x600 screens (the toshiba AC100, the Genesi-USA Ekiga and the AlwaysInnovating Touchbook) - i wish them every success in their niche markets that are catered for by 1024x600 screens. for everyone else, who wants to see full documents and full web pages *without* having to press page-up, page-down, there literally is not a single ARM-based (or MIPS-based) product in existence, commercially available, anywhere in the world, despite a lot of talk from ARM, and also from the major ARM licensees, and despite the production cost of ARM-based and MIPS-based laptops being lower than that of an equivalent intel-based system. so the question i have, for the people on this list is: given that nobody else is taking any initiative, would _you_ like to be part of a project that takes the initiative to create a low-cost, high-end ARM-based laptop? like the OpenPandora, except... done with far less risk and a lot less cost. one absolute key part in reducing risk and cost is to utilise existing casework from a no-brand OEM laptop. all that's then required is to create the motherboard to fit. more info here: http://lkcl.net/laptop.html a rough guide i've received from a chinese embedded systems designer is that a design using a Samsung S5PV210 will be about $USD 10,000, and a design using a TI DM3730 or DM3725 will be about $20,000 (TI's CPUs are a bit more complex, and the DM37xx series is newer than Samsung's S5 range)... but that's *it*. that's all it costs, to create the motherboard for fitting into an existing 12in laptop chassis. excluding a DVD or Hard Drive, the BOM (Bill of Materials) will come to somewhere around $150, which translates loosely into $240 to $300 after tax, customs, shipping etc. etc. i'm still investigating ways to get that price down even further, and i'm really really interested to hear from people who may know of other CPUs. i've just heard today about the ZMS-08 for example, and creativelabs have a SoM (system-on-module) which sounds like a perfect fit: the only bug-bear being the proprietary libraries and creativelab's fear over being swamped by developer wannabes asking for help on how to program one of the most complex Cell Processor Units in existence outside of IBM's and other obscure labs. the proprietary libraries aren't so much the problem as the lack of documentation on the Cell Processor. so - please do discuss amongst yourselves, or feel free to contact me directly. i'm maintaining a list of links to all the other forums this is going out on, at the bottom of http://lkcl.net/laptop.html - if you would like to recommend an alternative CPU please do review and/or edit http://libreplanet.org/wiki/Group:Hardware/Processors first (either the page itself or the discussion page). l.

10 33

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

arm February 2011