Re: Switching Fedora to pae kernel by default?
2009/1/20 Kyle McMartin k...@infradead.org: On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:06:17AM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: Eric Paris wrote: I've got a P3 (Coppermine) with 256M memory running F10. My significant other took it with her to Antarctica (Well F9 has been to Antarctica but it'll be F10 in Antarctica next month). You can only run one app at a time and have to be patient, but it's perfectly usable (and noone cares if this laptop is lost, stolen or destroyed [aside from her being pissed she lost all her research data]). I wouldn't/couldn't to use it as a daily machine, so while I'm in favor of -PAE default, F10 is usable on such small machines. I don't care if old machines need some bit twiddling to get to work, but we aren't dead yet :) By F12 you'll be down to zero apps at the same time, and slow... We can keep the non-PAE kernel, but as non-default in recognition that technology has moved on. Look, I'm sorry if I'm just not thinking big picture enough here, but what exactly is the use case for a PAE kernel these days? The compat code in x86_64 should be more than good enough for the apps that require an i686 chroot. I just don't see the status quo as doing any real harm, as the only generations of CPU that benefit are really P4 (which aren't worth the electricity used to power them) or Core (One) Duo (which didn't exist for a particularly long time...) Neither of which actually supported more than 3GB of RAM on their northbridges except for the Xeon chipsets anyway. I have no idea what the installer and livecd do, but to me, it would seem to be a waste of space to carry two sets of installable kernels on the discs, when one would do. That said again, I'm suprised we aren't installing i586 kernels by default... Odd. I think the ideal solution here is to support x86_64 kernel, i686 userspace more actively. What, honestly, are the odds of someone with a bunch of P4 Xeons these days with 32GB of ram running Fedora? Are there really enough of them that it's worth caring? ;-) Of course, take what I say with a grain of salt. I don't particularly care at all, I'm just trying to play the pragmatist. Another question is what's the perf penalty of going to PAE on a 2GB of ram machine versus the vanilla HIGHMEM4G config? The only argument I really buy into is the NX one, honestly... What about a yum plugin that recommends a kernel that the user could override? I'll poke at it this afternoon (hey, I've always wanted to learn python...) May I point out that those that care enough to want PAE usually know how to go about getting it enabled whereas those that have install failure because they're running non-PAE hardware probably wont know how to go about getting it disabled. The fall-out from this going onto the livecd makes me shudder. The original argument that many machines have 4GB of memory is simply false. Manufacturers aren't shipping anything more than 2GB on desktops at most unless you have oodles of money to throw at a Alienware box or something. Sure, servers come with more but Fedora is not really a reality for a long term server O.S. -- Christopher Brown ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: Switching Fedora to pae kernel by default?
Christopher Brown wrote: May I point out that those that care enough to want PAE usually know how to go about getting it enabled whereas those that have install failure because they're running non-PAE hardware probably wont know how to go about getting it disabled. You mean, ordinary users don't care about security? Because that's one of the advantages that PAE brings. You're right, they don't care, we have to care for them. The fall-out from this going onto the livecd makes me shudder. You're pushing out a development problem to the users. The original argument that many machines have 4GB of memory is simply false. My ~3yo home box has 4GB. I'm not an ordinary user (or it would be a computer, not a box), but I don't think you can claim 4GB is rare. Manufacturers aren't shipping anything more than 2GB on desktops at most unless you have oodles of money to throw at a Alienware box or something. Sure, servers come with more but Fedora is not really a reality for a long term server O.S Servers should use x86_64 anyway. But I strongly disagree about penalizing the future to cater for the past. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: Switching Fedora to pae kernel by default?
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 09:15:24AM +, Christopher Brown wrote: The original argument that many machines have 4GB of memory is simply false. Manufacturers aren't shipping anything more than 2GB on desktops at most unless you have oodles of money to throw at a Alienware box or something. Sure, servers come with more but Fedora is not really a reality for a long term server O.S. Actually, it works fine. I have a server that has only ever run Fedora. josh ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: Switching Fedora to pae kernel by default?
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 11:41:04AM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: Servers should use x86_64 anyway. But I strongly disagree about No they shouldn't. They should use PowerPC. Then this whole stupid argument wouldn't even matter. /me stops antagonizing people now. josh ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: Switching Fedora to pae kernel by default?
On Wednesday, January 21 2009, Kyle McMartin said: On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 09:15:24AM +, Christopher Brown wrote: The fall-out from this going onto the livecd makes me shudder. Jesse explained this to me, To clarify: the anaconda installer is i586, and all 3 kernel flavours are shipped on the disc. I would imagine the livecd is i586 and will remain that way. No, the livecd is i686. Because due to other things about the livecd, you have to have more ram than most i586s would support. The number of i586 users we have is minimal. The number of non-pae i686 users we have is much more significant. Jeremy ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
F10 EDAC Errors on intel based server
Hi, Just did a new install of Fedora 10 on an 8 core intel server (2 quad cores) and i got the following messages during first boot. They are continuosly being printed to the terminal just about every second. I originally had an install of Fedora 9 on this server and did not see any such errors. kernel version 2.6.27.5-117.fc10.x86_64 Below are the errors EDAC i5000 MCO: NON-FATAL ERRORS Found!!! 1st NON-FATAL Err Reg= 0x4 EDAC i5000: SPD Protocol Error, bits=0x4 Any thoughts why this is happening? - Ted ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
[PATCH] kernel: only build kernel-headers on ARM
Since kernels for different ARM CPUs differ wildly, and since
embedded folks tend to provide their own kernels, this patch makes
the Fedora kernel package only build kernel-headers when built for
ARM.
Please consider for inclusion.
Signed-off-by: Lennert Buytenhek buyt...@marvell.com
Signed-off-by: Kedar Sovani ked...@marvell.com
---
Makefile.config |5 -
config-arm | 15 +++
kernel.spec | 16 +---
3 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 config-arm
diff --git a/Makefile.config b/Makefile.config
index 09adc2e..bc1420a 100644
--- a/Makefile.config
+++ b/Makefile.config
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ CONFIGFILES = \
$(CFG)-i686.config $(CFG)-i686-PAE.config \
$(CFG)-i686-debug.config $(CFG)-i686-PAEdebug.config \
$(CFG)-x86_64.config $(CFG)-x86_64-debug.config \
- $(CFG)-s390x.config \
+ $(CFG)-s390x.config $(CFG)-arm.config \
$(CFG)-ppc.config $(CFG)-ppc-smp.config \
$(CFG)-sparc64.config $(CFG)-sparc64-smp.config \
$(CFG)-ppc64.config $(CFG)-ppc64-kdump.config $(CFG)-ppc64-debug.config
\
@@ -102,6 +102,9 @@ kernel-$(VERSION)-ppc64-debug.config: config-powerpc64
temp-powerpc-debug-generi
kernel-$(VERSION)-s390x.config: config-s390x temp-s390-generic
perl merge.pl $^ s390 $@
+kernel-$(VERSION)-arm.config: config-arm temp-generic
+ perl merge.pl $^ arm $@
+
kernel-$(VERSION)-ppc.config: /dev/null temp-powerpc32-generic
perl merge.pl $^ powerpc $@
diff --git a/config-arm b/config-arm
new file mode 100644
index 000..692f205
--- /dev/null
+++ b/config-arm
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+CONFIG_ARM=y
+CONFIG_SYS_SUPPORTS_APM_EMULATION=y
+# CONFIG_SMP is not set
+
+CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=y
+
+CONFIG_ARCH_VERSATILE=y
+
+CONFIG_ARM_THUMB=y
+
+CONFIG_AEABI=y
+CONFIG_OABI_COMPAT=y
+
+CONFIG_CMDLINE=console=ttyAM0,115200 root=/dev/sda1 rootdelay=20
+
diff --git a/kernel.spec b/kernel.spec
index 04fc5ee..2ce025d 100644
--- a/kernel.spec
+++ b/kernel.spec
@@ -347,6 +347,14 @@ Summary: The Linux kernel
%define kernel_image vmlinux
%endif
+%ifarch %{arm}
+%define all_arch_configs kernel-%{version}-arm*.config
+%define image_install_path boot
+%define hdrarch arm
+%define make_target vmlinux
+%define kernel_image vmlinux
+%endif
+
%if %{nopatches}
# XXX temporary until last vdso patches are upstream
%define vdso_arches ppc ppc64
@@ -367,8 +375,8 @@ Summary: The Linux kernel
# Which is a BadThing(tm).
# We don't build a kernel on i386; we only do kernel-headers there,
-# and we no longer build for 31bit S390. Same for 32bit sparc.
-%define nobuildarches i386 s390 sparc
+# and we no longer build for 31bit S390. Same for 32bit sparc and arm.
+%define nobuildarches i386 s390 sparc %{arm}
%ifarch %nobuildarches
%define with_up 0
@@ -463,7 +471,7 @@ Version: %{rpmversion}
Release: %{pkg_release}
# DO NOT CHANGE THE 'ExclusiveArch' LINE TO TEMPORARILY EXCLUDE AN
ARCHITECTURE BUILD.
# SET %%nobuildarches (ABOVE) INSTEAD
-ExclusiveArch: noarch %{all_x86} x86_64 ppc ppc64 ia64 sparc sparc64 s390x
alpha alphaev56
+ExclusiveArch: noarch %{all_x86} x86_64 ppc ppc64 ia64 sparc sparc64 s390x
alpha alphaev56 %{arm}
ExclusiveOS: Linux
%kernel_reqprovconf
@@ -562,6 +570,8 @@ Patch00: patch-2.6.%{base_sublevel}-git%{gitrev}.bz2
%endif
%endif
+Source100: config-arm
+
%if %{using_upstream_branch}
### BRANCH PATCH ###
%endif
--
1.5.3.3
___
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: F10 EDAC Errors on intel based server
Ted Sume Nzuonkwelle wrote: Hi, Just did a new install of Fedora 10 on an 8 core intel server (2 quad cores) and i got the following messages during first boot. They are continuosly being printed to the terminal just about every second. I originally had an install of Fedora 9 on this server and did not see any such errors. kernel version 2.6.27.5-117.fc10.x86_64 Below are the errors EDAC i5000 MCO: NON-FATAL ERRORS Found!!! 1st NON-FATAL Err Reg= 0x4 EDAC i5000: SPD Protocol Error, bits=0x4 Any thoughts why this is happening? Well Google is your friend, isn't it? http://faq.aslab.com/index.php?sid=8574lang=enaction=artikelcat=93id=154artlang=en -of ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
