Discussion:
[fedora-arm] Fedora ARM 12 on IGEPv2 (Beagle Board clone)
Matthew Wilson
2009-11-26 20:27:28 UTC
Permalink
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=46&Itemid=55

[2] http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.ddi0344j/Beihgifg.html
Kedar Sovani
2009-11-27 08:26:33 UTC
Permalink
-----Original Message-----
From: fedora-arm-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:fedora-arm-
bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of Matthew Wilson
...snip...
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).
Yes, you can pick up the kernel source rpm for Fedora and use
that.
Alternatively, you could just try the latest stable vanilla
kernel.
b) Would it then make sense to offer these as pre-built RPMs
for common systems?
I guess someone was looking into making this available. In the
meanwhile, kernel images for commonly required boards are
accessible from the Fedora-ARM wiki.
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).
Treat the latest to be the greatest? :-)
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.
I am not entirely sure on this... Anyone?
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?
These rpms are now available on koji:
http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=21323
http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=21322

This usually happens because we check for the repoclosure of a
set of package groups. Packages beyond these may have dangling
dependencies. These usually get addressed, during the mass build
run (which will start in this week) or on-demand, like in this
case.
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?
You can fix alignment errors in the current versions as well by:
# echo 2 > /proc/cpu/alignment

With hardware support it will be faster.
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?
As you point out, it is about time and priorities. These will get
addressed in the mass build run that will start this week. If you
provide me with a list of packages I'll move them to the top of
the list.
I look forward to being able to contribute something back into
Fedora!
Great! You are welcome...
Kind regards,
Matthew
Kedar.
[1] http://www.igep-
platform.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=46&It
emid=55
[2]
http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.ddi
0344j/Beihgifg.html
Lennert Buytenhek
2009-11-27 09:31:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kedar Sovani
Post by Matthew Wilson
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.)
Yes, this is no problem -- you can run v4 applications on a v7
kernel just fine.
Post by Kedar Sovani
Post by Matthew Wilson
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.
I am not entirely sure on this... Anyone?
The calling standard is actually compatible, so e.g. it's no
problem to run an softfloat-compiled application with a library
built for VFP and vice versa.
Gregg Lebovitz
2010-02-04 18:31:09 UTC
Permalink
Matt,

I saw your posting on the fedora-arm mailing list.

I am doing some work for Ti, Freescale, and the folks who make the
BeagleBoard, and I would like to get fedora on the BeagleBoard.

I was wondering if you made any progress? I am currently building for
the arm5TE, but would be interested in any work an building fedora for
an Arm7.

Regards.

Gregg
--
Nokia Certified Qt Developer
Certified Qt Trainer

ICS - The User Interface Company
Robert Nelson
2010-02-04 19:42:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gregg Lebovitz
Matt,
I saw your posting on the fedora-arm mailing list.
I am doing some work for Ti, Freescale, and the folks who make the
BeagleBoard, and I would like to get fedora on the BeagleBoard.
I was wondering if you made any progress? I am currently building for
the arm5TE, but would be interested in any work an building fedora for
an Arm7.
Regards.
Hi Gregg,

I had started some initial work on this in the Fedora 10 days..

http://elinux.org/BeagleBoardFedora

The BeagleBoard works just fine with the current Fedora 12 arm root
file systems.

I stopped due to problems getting mock/chroot to work correctly on the
beagle (inexperienced fedora user), to generate proper armv7 optimized
rpm's.. Then got busy working on ubuntu's arm distribution.

Regards,
--
Robert Nelson
http://www.rcn-ee.com/
Matthew Wilson
2010-02-04 21:57:46 UTC
Permalink
Hi all,

Firstly, apologies for being so slow in replying. I had a flurry of
activity over xmas with my IGEPv2, but since returning to work I've
not been doing much with it. This is down to a lack of motivation on
my part rather than having no time :(

Thank you for your replies.

I still have the medium-term goal to use it as a mini-server: simple
things like local bookmark server (two laptops + desktop needing the
same bookmarks), small fileserver (not masses of storage, but for
sharing documents), print server, etc. I'd like to run it as a media
player too (plugged into the TV) -- that's a longer-term goal.

The Fedora 12 root image and packages worked well. I had an issue
that a lot of packages are missing. For example, to get cups running,
I had to build a lot of packages. I hit some circular dependency
issue too (can't recall the package OTTOMH -- maybe a LaTeX one?) but
that only seemed to be needed for generating documentation in the
package. It was usually a case of "yum install", collect missing
deps, download source RPM, rpmbuild --rebuild, collect missing deps,
etc.

(And using a microSD card for the rootfs was a mistake -- they are
*so* slow at writing that doing any builds or package installs became
painful. I now have a Samsung S1 mini -- low enough power that it
doesn't need a powered hub.)

I am interested in ARMv7-optimised builds -- but, more crucially,
getting updates from mainline Fedora pulled across. I have seen the
list of patches applied for ARM and wonder what the strategy would be
for applying those to the mainline packages.

I guess I ought to learn about koji if I'm *really* interested in
building v7 packages... but the v5 ones work just fine for now.

[My remaining issue is about the kernel. ISEE (makers of the IGEPv2)
now have a git repository (yay). Their kernel is based off of the
linux-omap 2.6.28-10 branch. The linux-omap main branch is a bit too
"bleeding edge" for me, but 28-10 is a little old.]

I have a few questions:

- What can be done to promote Fedora ARM?
- Are the koji builds of Fedora updates being pushed into the Fedora
ARM repository?
- Is there sufficient interest in armv7 builds to add that as a support variant?
- Can we collect experiences of usage of Fedora ARM (devices, purpose
of use, problems, etc.)?
- What can I do to help?
- Would a step-by-step guide for IGEPv2 (BeagleBoard will be very
similar) be useful?

And I shall make a concerted effort to be more active. :-)

Kind regards,
Matthew
Itamar Reis Peixoto
2010-02-04 22:09:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Wilson
- What can be done to promote Fedora ARM?
some tutorials, videos, howtos talking about fedora-arm
Post by Matthew Wilson
- Are the koji builds of Fedora updates being pushed into the Fedora
ARM repository?
I think fedora-arm needs more guy's working on it to make it grow.
Post by Matthew Wilson
- Is there sufficient interest in armv7 builds to add that as a support variant?
no idea, I think dgilmore at fedoraproject.org can answer your question.
Post by Matthew Wilson
- Can we collect experiences of usage of Fedora ARM (devices, purpose
of use, problems, etc.)?
- What can I do to help?
I have talk with dgilmore some day ago, and we need more man-power to
test some scripts and to put the things to work.

I need to take more care in buildsystem, automatic building packages
for fedora-arm when the package is built for primary arch's
Post by Matthew Wilson
- Would a step-by-step guide for IGEPv2 (BeagleBoard will be very
similar) be useful?
I think so.
Post by Matthew Wilson
And I shall make a concerted effort to be more active. :-)
Kind regards,
Matthew
--
------------

Itamar Reis Peixoto

e-mail/msn/google talk/sip: itamar at ispbrasil.com.br
skype: itamarjp
icq: 81053601
+55 11 4063 5033
+55 34 3221 8599
Dan Horák
2010-02-04 22:36:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Wilson
- What can be done to promote Fedora ARM?
show that it works on real hw
Post by Matthew Wilson
- Are the koji builds of Fedora updates being pushed into the Fedora
ARM repository?
AFAIK no, Fedora/ARM needs to start using koji-shadow
Post by Matthew Wilson
- Is there sufficient interest in armv7 builds to add that as a support variant?
the question is what needs to be built as armv7, maybe only few selected
packages will profit from being built as armv7 - like it was in Intel
world - only kernel+glibc+openssl were build as i686 while the rest was
i386
Post by Matthew Wilson
- Can we collect experiences of usage of Fedora ARM (devices, purpose
of use, problems, etc.)?
I own 2 devices based on Marvell Kirkwood - QNAP TS-219 running as a
server (file sharing/koji hub/...) and Sheevaplug as a
development/testing environment.

I also have a Genesi Efika MX based on Freescale i.MX515 (armv7), but
there is an issue that the kernel support is not yet in upstream.

The non-existency of kernel packages (together with means for their
updating) is another issue that blocks wider adoption. The low level
part (like flashing the kernel and ramdisk to flash memory) can be done
with the flash-kernel utility from Debian, but it still needs an
integration into grubby.


Dan
Andy Green
2010-02-04 22:46:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dan Horák
Post by Matthew Wilson
- What can be done to promote Fedora ARM?
show that it works on real hw
FWIW I have been working for txtr e-book reader folks for 10 months, I
have designed in Fedora as the rootfs for it. ARM Fedora works
excellently. Really solves so many problems you would otherwise have
getting any kind of quality from the rootfs, solid packaging, package
availability by yum and so on.
Post by Dan Horák
The non-existency of kernel packages (together with means for their
updating) is another issue that blocks wider adoption. The low level
part (like flashing the kernel and ramdisk to flash memory) can be done
with the flash-kernel utility from Debian, but it still needs an
integration into grubby.
Fedora rootfs basis really really suits being on SD card not raw NAND if
you can help it. With SD you can format the thing ext4 and it's very
hard to tell you are not on a normal Fedora box.

I don't think lack of kernel packages is a problem, when someone targets
a board with Fedora they will naturally make their own kernel package
for the board.

The kernel package I made for txtr simply copies stuff to the name the
bootloader expects in the /boot partition.

-Andy
Jeff Moe
2010-02-04 22:58:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andy Green
Post by Dan Horák
Post by Matthew Wilson
- What can be done to promote Fedora ARM?
show that it works on real hw
FWIW I have been working for txtr e-book reader folks for 10 months, I
have designed in Fedora as the rootfs for it. ARM Fedora works
excellently. Really solves so many problems you would otherwise have
getting any kind of quality from the rootfs, solid packaging, package
availability by yum and so on.
Cool. Repos here:
http://rpm.txtr.org/f11/txtr-a/

On this page:
http://developer.txtr.com/SVN_Code_Repository
it says to grab svn ala:

svn co https://developer.txtr.org/svn/ developer.txtr.org

But that isn't there and gives this error:
svn: PROPFIND request failed on '/svn'
svn: PROPFIND of '/svn': 302 Found (https://developer.txtr.org)

Thanks,

-Jeff
Andy Green
2010-02-04 23:05:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeff Moe
Post by Andy Green
Post by Dan Horák
Post by Matthew Wilson
- What can be done to promote Fedora ARM?
show that it works on real hw
FWIW I have been working for txtr e-book reader folks for 10 months, I
have designed in Fedora as the rootfs for it. ARM Fedora works
excellently. Really solves so many problems you would otherwise have
getting any kind of quality from the rootfs, solid packaging, package
availability by yum and so on.
http://rpm.txtr.org/f11/txtr-a/
http://developer.txtr.com/SVN_Code_Repository
svn co https://developer.txtr.org/svn/ developer.txtr.org
svn: PROPFIND request failed on '/svn'
svn: PROPFIND of '/svn': 302 Found (https://developer.txtr.org)
It's outdated, we have private git for a bunch of packages that aren't
released yet. This stuff isn't actually "out there" yet.

But you can get the kernel tree here (txtr-tracking branch)

http://git.warmcat.com/cgi-bin/cgit/txtr-kernel/log/?h=txtr-tracking

and the Qi bootloader (which boots directly from SD card -- the ROM
actually pulls it in from SD) here

http://git.warmcat.com/cgi-bin/cgit/qi/log/?h=txtr

I'm planning to be at FOSDEM if anyone wants to get evangelized about
the value of ARM Fedora with SD boot and see it in action please ping me :-)

-Andy
Jeff Moe
2010-02-04 22:24:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Wilson
- What can be done to promote Fedora ARM?
Make it run well on something cool.
Post by Matthew Wilson
- Is there sufficient interest in armv7 builds to add that as a support variant?
Yes! With NEON support and such. This would be nice for the Nokia N900. :)
Post by Matthew Wilson
- Can we collect experiences of usage of Fedora ARM (devices, purpose
of use, problems, etc.)?
It's just a start, but here's my mini-HOWTO about getting Fedora running on N900:
http://wiki.maemo.org/User:Jebba/Fedora
Post by Matthew Wilson
- Would a step-by-step guide for IGEPv2 (BeagleBoard will be very
similar) be useful?
Perhaps it's there and I simply haven't tracked it down, but docs on how you build the rootfs.tar.gz would be nice.

Thanks!

-Jeff
Stefano Cavallari
2010-02-14 15:26:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gregg Lebovitz
Matt,
I saw your posting on the fedora-arm mailing list.
I am doing some work for Ti, Freescale, and the folks who make the
BeagleBoard, and I would like to get fedora on the BeagleBoard.
I was wondering if you made any progress? I am currently building for
the arm5TE, but would be interested in any work an building fedora for
an Arm7.
I have an IGEPv2 board too, and Fedora 12 seems to run well.
I'm using a prebuilt kernel which I "stole" from the NAND, and the rootfs from
Fedora wiki.
I'd like to run a native kernel though.
From the TODO in the wiki I see:
- Add prebuilt kernel images for a number of popular ARM boards.
Is there some automatic infrastructure to do that?
I mean something like:
* take latest Fedora kernel release source rpm
* add machine specific patches
* build various rpm (per-board)
* expose them in a repository
If there isn't such a thing yet, is anyone interested in setting it up? I have
some spare bandwidth and diskspace on my VPS, and some spare time too. I don't
know much of embedded development but probably enough to find the right
patches around to build a working kernel.

I think that after the BeagleBoard & clones there is a new kind of Linux-ARM
users which aren't really interested in embedded development, but just want a
low power server/appliance/whatever without messing too much with the
hardware.
--
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/arm/attachments/20100214/349e5c55/attachment.bin
Matthew Wilson
2010-02-14 20:12:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefano Cavallari
I have an IGEPv2 board too, and Fedora 12 seems to run well.
I'm using a prebuilt kernel which I "stole" from the NAND, and the rootfs from
Fedora wiki.
I'd like to run a native kernel though.
I'm not sure which is better. The linux-omap branch (from which ISEE
take their kernel) has lots more support for the OMAP hw. But, yes,
I'd rather see something closer to mainline if possible.
Post by Stefano Cavallari
If there isn't such a thing yet, is anyone interested in setting it up?
Yes, although I'm no expert.

I think the issue is getting a stable set of patches against the
Fedora kernel for each supported board. I tried rebasing some of the
ISEE changes against a 2.6.32 but failed to get something meaningful.

Perhaps we could chat off-list and work out a good set of patches for the IGEP?
Post by Stefano Cavallari
I think that after the BeagleBoard & clones there is a new kind of Linux-ARM
users which aren't really interested in embedded development, but just want a
low power server/appliance/whatever without messing too much with the
hardware.
Definitely! Someone commented, when I was running the Fedora GNOME
desktop, "That's just like your PC!"

I was pleased to be able to buy the IGEPv2. There are lots of
embedded dev boards available, but the dev kits often cost >1000 UKP.

I haven't had any time to spend on my board this week -- however, I'm
still working on my howto guide. I'll email the list when I have
something.

Regards,
Matthew
Stefano Cavallari
2010-02-15 12:01:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Wilson
Post by Stefano Cavallari
I have an IGEPv2 board too, and Fedora 12 seems to run well.
I'm using a prebuilt kernel which I "stole" from the NAND, and the rootfs
from Fedora wiki.
I'd like to run a native kernel though.
I'm not sure which is better. The linux-omap branch (from which ISEE
take their kernel) has lots more support for the OMAP hw. But, yes,
I'd rather see something closer to mainline if possible.
Maybe we can just apply relevant fedora patches to the omap branch. The
important thing (IMHO) is to keep up with security updates and have a kernel
config similar with the one of Fedora.
Post by Matthew Wilson
I think the issue is getting a stable set of patches against the
Fedora kernel for each supported board. I tried rebasing some of the
ISEE changes against a 2.6.32 but failed to get something meaningful.
Perhaps we could chat off-list and work out a good set of patches for the IGEP?
Good idea, I sent you a mail with my contacts.
--
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/arm/attachments/20100215/38b71be4/attachment.bin
m***@yahoo.co.in
2016-01-01 12:13:54 UTC
Permalink
With best compliments from


https://www.makingmove.com/
https://www.makingmove.com/packers-and-movers-ahmedabad
https://www.makingmove.com/packers-and-movers-bangalore
https://www.makingmove.com/packers-and-movers-chandigarh
https://www.makingmove.com/packers-and-movers-chennai
https://www.makingmove.com/packers-and-movers-cochin
https://www.makingmove.com/packers-and-movers-hyderabad
https://www.makingmove.com/packers-and-movers-new-delhi
https://www.makingmove.com/packers-and-movers-kolkata
https://www.makingmove.com/packers-and-movers-mumbai
https://www.makingmove.com/packers-and-movers-pune
https://www.makingmove.com/car-movers-motorcycle-carriers

Loading...