20:01:04 #startmeeting Fedora ARM weekly status meeting 20:01:04 Meeting started Wed Apr 17 20:01:04 2013 UTC. The chair is pwhalen. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 20:01:04 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 20:01:04 #chair pwhalen jonmasters bconoboy ctyler pbrobinson dgilmore 20:01:04 Current chairs: bconoboy ctyler dgilmore jonmasters pbrobinson pwhalen 20:01:16 good afternoon all 20:01:21 * masta look in 20:01:24 .fas pwhalen 20:01:24 pwhalen: pwhalen 'Paul Whalen' 20:01:27 * j_dulaney waves 20:01:28 .fas parasense 20:01:29 masta: parasense 'Jon Disnard' 20:01:32 .fas agreene 20:01:33 agreene: tag4fedora 'Tim Greene' - agreene 'Andrew Greene' 20:01:34 * pbrobinson is here 20:01:38 .fas oatley 20:01:38 oatley: oatley 'Andrew Oatley-Willis' 20:01:39 .fas jdulaney 20:01:39 .fas ahs3 20:01:41 j_dulaney: jdulaney 'John Dulaney' 20:01:44 ahs3: ahs3 'Al Stone' 20:02:09 .fas .greene 20:02:09 fossjon: agreene 'Andrew Greene' 20:02:37 #topic 0) Status of ACTION items from our previous meeting 20:02:45 #info -COMPLETE- bconoboy to work out remaining minimal F19 package set requiring aarch64 autotools patching 20:02:58 #info masta, j_dulaney, oatley to try upstream kernel on a10 devices 20:03:09 #link http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-04-10/fedora-meeting-1.2013-04-10-20.00.html 20:03:15 .fas blc@ 20:03:16 bconoboy: blc '' 20:03:20 did you guys have a chance to try the kernel? 20:03:56 pwhalen: No go 20:04:09 I built 3.9rc6 on it, but it wouldn't boot 20:04:09 pwhalen: Nope, sorry 20:04:36 pwhalen: is it part of the unified kernel now? or does it have to be rebuilt? 20:04:39 j_dulaney: build from source, did you try the defconfig? 20:04:46 it is part of the unfied 20:04:52 unified 20:04:56 pbrobinson: I did try defconfig 20:05:08 j_dulaney, was this on the gooseberry? 20:05:11 I've not had the time to test the A10 kernel, sry 20:05:13 so what we especially need is for them to test the kernel pbrobinson is building 20:05:18 pwhalen: Indeed 20:05:24 likely needs more work, it's on my list but as there's still quite a bit of needed bits missing it's well down the list below mvebu and likely imx6 20:05:48 .fas jcapik 20:05:49 jcapik: jcapik 'Jaromír Cápík' 20:06:06 #info j_dulaney tried 3.9rc6 upstream kernel on a Gooseberry using the defconfig, did not boot 20:06:22 anything else from last week? 20:07:15 #topic 1) Problem packages 20:07:39 the list is getting there, the last week was terribly busy 20:07:53 the main problem package is python3 20:07:59 which is being worked upon 20:08:19 #info python3 current problem package being worked on 20:08:33 the latest java build from today is FTBFS but I've already got a bug open for that and it just looks like a patch issue and it's already been assigned 20:09:22 bz for the logs? 20:09:34 awaitng my BZ instance to reload 20:09:44 I've already got a lot of fixes that are queued in updates-testing so we're awaiting the tree reopening 20:09:58 java-1.7.0-openjdk https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=953257 20:10:19 '#info python3 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=951802 20:10:56 #info java-1.7.0-openjdk FTBFS 20:11:07 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=953257 20:11:45 anything else? 20:12:00 what's the status on tog-pegasus? 20:12:13 it's ongoing 20:12:15 there's not been any movement on it for a number of weeks 20:12:27 or at least perceived 20:12:34 #info python3 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=951802 20:12:37 dmarlin is actively working on it. it's an atomics issue. 20:12:57 Can we get him to be a bit more vocal? 20:12:59 It's always an atomics issue, it seems 20:13:16 I thought v7 supported atomics 20:13:31 * j_dulaney thought so, as well 20:13:56 v7 supports atomics, but tog-pegasus doesn't support armv7 atomics. 20:13:59 GCC has pretty darn good atomics support these days 20:14:00 jsmith: we are debugging a synchronization issue in a testcase that needs atomic operations to work, but so far the patch is not handling it correctly 20:14:35 I wish more upstream projects would leverage GCC's atomics support rather than write their own, which isn't arch portable 20:15:24 on to the next? 20:15:40 #info tog-pegasus: dmarlin is continuing to work on atomics issues 20:15:58 pwhalen: y 20:15:59 #topic 2) Aarch64 patching - status update 20:16:11 is this config.guess or bootstrap? 20:16:19 config.guess 20:16:21 We discussed the aarch64 patching on the last secondaryarch meeting again and my colleagues consider the bug description insufficient (autoreconf needs to be supplied with --install --force switches or their short version -i -v in order to change the config.* files to support aarch64 ... there should be autoreconf BuildRequires mentioned too). They believe it would be good to create a wiki page providing a better description of the 20:16:23 patching so the former 20:16:57 dgilmore: what say you? 20:17:19 I agree the description could be improved 20:17:32 but it's not completely bad 20:18:14 One more note ... the script generating the package list is going to be enhanced and we expect more bug reports 20:18:59 since some of the packages were skipped even when they don't support aarch64 20:19:46 jcapik: what secondaryarch meeting? 20:20:30 it wasn't a meeting from memory, I though it was just discussed on the channel at the end of last week 20:20:56 pbrobinson: jcapik explicitly mentioned a secondaryarch meeting and i have no idea what he is talking about 20:20:57 jcapik: er, who is updating the script? I think ahs3 has that ball 20:21:01 jcapik: is it autoreconf with --install _and_ --force or is it --install _or_ --force? 20:21:18 bconoboy: yup. in progress, doing some testing of the changes right now 20:22:13 dgilmore: I realise that, I think he's referring to the discussion we had on the channel, it wasn't a meeting though 20:23:41 maybe we lost him? 20:23:46 pbrobinson: 20:16 < jcapik> We discussed the aarch64 patching on the last secondaryarch meeting again and my colleagues consider the bug description insufficient 20:23:58 I just tried to explain what meating I'm talking about 20:24:01 sounds like a meeting outside of the arm meeting 20:24:18 ahs3: I believe both, I've found that -vif (which I believe is install, force and verbose) to be the most useful combo that works regularly 20:24:19 jcapik: where? 20:24:28 dgilmore: private message 20:24:37 jcapik: i dont have one from you 20:24:53 Can we start over please? 20:24:59 pbrobinson: that's my understanding, too. thx 20:25:35 dgilmore filed bz's, many packages have not yet been updated- who is doing what next? 20:26:00 so we've got a couple of things 20:26:07 first we need a proposed updated script 20:26:28 (not it!) 20:26:28 who out of jcapik / ahs3 or someone else is handling that 20:26:37 ahs3: it's --install and --force 20:26:40 pbrobinson: i am 20:26:49 ahs3: eta? 20:26:55 ahs3: or -i -f ... or -if ... or -i --force or --install -f 20:27:02 jcapik: thx 20:27:18 ahs3: and other combinations 20:27:22 pbrobinson: i hope to start a scan of all the packages this evening 20:27:40 jcapik: right 20:27:48 OK so I propose that ahs3 has the action item and we review again next week 20:27:56 ahs3: and even of that there are cases when the files remain unchanged 20:28:26 ahs3: can you co-ordinate with dgilmore/me with an updated list so that we can organise to update existing bugs/open new ones 20:28:27 Is there anything else to be done before ahs3 has his script updated? 20:28:30 ahs3: so the maintainer should explicitly check if the config.* files are changed by the autoreconf -fi 20:28:41 ahs3: I recommend autoreconf -vif 20:29:03 once we have an updated list we can work out what message needs to be added to the bugs and process 20:29:06 #action ahs3 will update the package scanner to better handle false positives and negatives 20:29:09 lets get the list first 20:29:40 #info an updated message with more accurate instructions for recipients will be crafted after the list is regenerated 20:29:46 what about the existing open BZs? 20:29:55 Are we proposing to append to them? 20:30:26 bconoboy: we should append a message containing a link to a newly created wiki page 20:30:51 i've started looking thru those BZs to double check their accuracy, too 20:31:14 any volunteers for crafting a new message with better instructions? 20:31:49 bconoboy: I'm happy to work on that with ahs3 and dgilmore 20:31:53 bconoboy: i'd be glad to help 20:32:15 #action ahs3/pbrobinson/dgilmore will write the updated directions 20:32:23 okay :-) next? 20:32:33 #topic 3) F19 Alpha planning 20:32:39 bconoboy: im not doing any of it 20:32:57 dgilmore: you can act in an advisory capacity ;-) 20:33:06 dgilmore: I just need you for your BZ script and permissions :) 20:33:08 ("no") 20:34:11 Do we want to talk kernel status first before Alpha? 20:34:14 Okay, F19 planning- we need to make an alpha pretty soon 20:34:21 We have some issues 20:34:29 live media creator is still broken on f19 20:34:50 (The anaconda hfstools dependency is fixed though) 20:35:09 arm-boot-config (gruboot as was) still needs wider testing 20:35:12 so what's the issue now? 20:35:16 with anaconfa 20:35:19 anaconda 20:35:27 anaconda is fine, lmc simply does not work. 20:35:50 we can make f19 images with f18's lmc, but not with f19's lmc 20:35:52 the anaconda problem is in the storaqge setup, but i've not got far with the anaconda folks, they seem to say the logs are right... though I disagree... the problem is in the code that applies the fdisk/disklabel 20:36:04 +1 20:36:14 oh, yeah, anaconda is fine * (But still doesn't grok arm partitioning) 20:36:23 so what's the problem with lmc then 20:36:42 when you create an image, it goes into that part of the creation, then fails.. the image is created in /var/tmp, but if you do fdisk -l /var/tmp/imgname it has no partition tables 20:37:08 It gets to Anaconda's partitioning stage and borks 20:37:09 dmarlin: is what masta talking about the same thing you see or are there two issues? 20:37:15 no problem with lcm as best I can tell, looks to be in anaconda 20:37:22 It essentially goes into an infinite loop 20:37:33 fyi I just run anaconda directly, manually give it the loop-dev's 20:37:40 is there a big difference between f18/f19 code? 20:37:52 Even running anaconda manually, it still goes into infinite loop 20:37:58 yes 20:38:00 masta: lmc uses anaconda for the insstall 20:38:02 pbrobinson: huge- recall why f18 was delayed. the work on both anaconda and lmc are both ongoing 20:38:31 How is ARM partitioning so different from x86? 20:39:02 your forced to have a fat32 partition 1? 20:39:05 not much diff 20:39:09 I'm not sure livemedia-creator is being used on x86 yet either 20:39:24 and especially not in --novirt mode 20:39:29 fossjon: not on highbank/tegra your not 20:39:39 pbrobinson: on arm there are some platform specific bits for panda to ensure the /boot filesystem/partition is first thinng so the MLO is first thing.... quirks like that 20:39:46 fossjon: and some x86 platforms need a vfat partition too for EFI 20:39:59 there are not many other partitioning quirks for arm platforms 20:40:12 I think anaconda is borking not due to arm/x86 diffs, but due to doing it on filesystem images 20:40:25 I get the same bug under x86 20:40:42 pbrobinson: on x86 the layout of the partitions is not ensured to be this one or that one first thing as one might expect 20:40:55 well /boot is first on x86 too and needs to be primary. For main non omap build it doesn't need uboot so does anaconda work in that way? 20:40:56 But, in my talks with the Anaconda folks, they seemed to have little interest in fixing it 20:41:12 dmarlin: is what masta talking about the same thing you see or are there two issues? 20:41:25 pbrobinson: look for platform.py in anaconda to see what I'm talking about 20:41:44 not entirely sure, but I think j_dulaney has it right... not just an arm issue 20:41:46 I have no urge to look at anaconda python code, I have enough to deal with 20:42:03 bconoboy: I agree, I don't think this is just an arm issue either 20:42:12 my question is does it work with 3 partitons of /boot / and swap? 20:42:13 pbrobinson: :) 20:42:33 I think it's due to the fact we are using lmc (which is not being used much) and using --novirt 20:42:43 pbrobinson: It goes to create a disklabel and that's where it stops 20:42:44 because for the multiplatform default that's all we need 20:42:51 bconoboy: which implies it's a possible issue of how LMC invokes anaconda 20:43:21 * masta is not sure, needs more time to poke... or time in general 20:43:25 pbrobinson: It doesn't even get to the partition creation step 20:43:41 * j_dulaney will poke some more tonight 20:43:52 j_dulaney: let's coordinate 20:43:59 masta: Roger 20:44:10 I don't see why it should be any different for our default target than x86 20:44:23 what's the kickstart that's being used? 20:44:26 I was doing some tracing (during this meeting) and it seems to be asking a question (which is not allowed in command line mode), but not erroring out... just waiting 20:44:59 dmarlin: what's the question? All questions should be answerable in a kickstart? 20:44:59 pbrobinson: I've hit the bug with several kickstarts, including the x86 kickstart used to install F19 on my x86 laptop 20:45:14 pbrobinson: not from lmc (command line mode) 20:45:17 j_dulaney: are there bugs open for those? 20:45:30 pbrobinson: I don't know; I haven't opened any 20:45:31 dmarlin: does lmc not use a kickstart? 20:45:37 pbrobinson: it does 20:45:38 It does 20:45:55 masta dmarlin: Have y'all opened any bugs? 20:45:59 dmarlin: so you should be able to specify it there without cmd line 20:46:06 If not, I'll open up one right after the meeting 20:46:06 j_dulaney: I have two 20:46:11 Okay 20:46:37 dmarlin: Numbers? 20:46:38 j_dulaney: please file bugs for those issues, there should be no regressions in kickstarts and i know of a couple of people that are making sure there's no regressions there 20:46:59 dmarlin: what are they? 20:47:17 pbrobinson: looking... please be patient 20:47:25 OK 20:47:51 j_dulaney: no BZ yet, i'd like to have a solid problem-statement first 20:48:09 pbrobinson: one is 920764 20:48:47 pbrobinson: another - 895258 20:48:54 pbrobinson: those started in f18 20:48:58 #info F19 alpha image generation is being held up by problems with live media creator and/or anaconda 20:49:15 #link livemedia-creator fails to make an ISO image using --novirt: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=920764 20:49:53 #link livemedia-creator appears to hang when using --novirt --image-only: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895258 20:50:22 * j_dulaney just cced 20:50:24 anything else we should discuss for f19 alpha? (kernel is next) 20:50:28 dmarlin: thanks 20:50:31 np 20:50:49 can everyone make sure that any arm BZs are linked against the tracker bug please? 20:50:54 What're we tentatively supporting in f19 alpha? 20:51:12 highbank, tegra, omap, vexpress, anything else? 20:51:51 at the moment that will do, I've started looking closer at mvebu 20:52:06 but I think that'll be better for beta 20:52:23 pbrobinson: Which tracker, F19Alphablocker? 20:52:24 mvebu will only work with appended dtb 20:52:28 fyi 20:52:33 ARMTracker 20:52:37 Ah 20:52:40 bconoboy: =( 20:52:40 * j_dulaney will do so 20:52:51 #info Current F19 alpha target platform list: highbank, tegra, omap, vexpress 20:52:56 that's due to shit support of uboot from Marvell 20:52:58 masta: no uboot support for dtbs yet 20:53:17 mvebu is that really true of all Armada boards, or just boards with a bad u-boot? 20:53:45 masta: I have seen just about every mvebu-using-board in existence and none of them support dtbs. 20:54:17 * masta has a mirabox armada-370 kit shipping to him right now, to test mvebu 20:54:43 bconoboy: ok well that answers the question, thx ;) 20:54:55 lmv bugs now blocking armtracker 20:55:00 well what else do we have to cover for alpha? 20:55:02 s/lmv/lmc 20:55:16 it would be good if more people who test the arm boot loader generator 20:55:21 currently pwhalen is rocking with it 20:55:25 http://people.fedoraproject.org/~blc/fedora-arm/arm-boot-config/ 20:55:35 great tool if your testing kernels 20:55:45 and all around of course :) 20:55:53 #link Enjoy uboot kernel menus, recover from bad kernels with ease, try http://people.fedoraproject.org/~blc/fedora-arm/arm-boot-config/ 20:56:09 * j_dulaney did not know of that 20:56:21 currently well tested on tegra and highbank 20:56:37 might work on omap and armada xp 20:56:40 bconoboy: which u-boot required on trimslice? 20:56:48 dmarlin: 2012 uboot 20:57:20 it was tested on the Pandaboard too, however the Pandaboard doesnt boot with a dtb that I know of 20:57:40 Also, if we're going to support a10 would somebody send me the output of their uboot's 'printenv' and their working boot.scr? 20:58:30 j_dulaney, do you have a serial connection on your gooseberry? 20:58:33 * masta will do printenv on his googeberry/hackberry thing 20:59:19 masta, same question 20:59:21 pwhalen: pandaboard doesn't support dtb? 20:59:22 pwhalen: I do 20:59:43 soldered it on? 20:59:48 pwhalen: Aye 20:59:56 pwhalen: I will make a cable if I have to 20:59:57 bconoboy, it doesnt boot when you select the dtb 20:59:58 * j_dulaney has mad soldering skillz from building models 21:00:01 #info Currently supports tegra, highbank, omap: Contact bconoboy to add support for your device 21:00:09 only boots without one 21:00:21 pwhalen: This 3.9? 21:00:26 right can we get back on topic please 21:00:27 been considering soldering one onto the board too 21:00:31 sorry 21:00:34 sorry, yeah 21:00:36 bconoboy, it is 21:00:38 what's outstanding on the alpha topic? 21:01:00 other stuff we won't know about until we have images to tet 21:01:04 er, test 21:01:08 we're on the hour 21:01:11 revisit next week? 21:01:13 y 21:01:14 okay 21:01:16 so what else needs to be covered 21:01:20 #topic 4) 3.9 Kernel Update 21:01:49 so as of today we have a booting 3.9 kernel on tegra/vexpress/highbank and omap! 21:01:59 none are particularly stable 21:02:04 with caveats :-) 21:02:16 #info kernel-3.9.0-0.rc7.git0.2.fc19 booting on tegra/vexpress/highbank and omap 21:02:20 but they're working with a multiplatform kernel which is a good start! 21:02:38 so next up is stabilisation 21:02:46 and getting mvebu booting 21:02:51 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/Quality_Assurance/Kernel_Testing/Fedora_19#kernel-3.9.0-0.rc7.git0.2.fc19_.28scratch_build.29 21:03:16 #link http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1716496 21:03:16 * ahs3 ^5s pbrobinson 21:03:28 its a scratch build, so harder to find 21:03:43 there's a proper build on its way 21:03:43 * j_dulaney notes also that 3.9 boots to text console on Exynos5 21:03:53 As of RC5 21:04:01 j_dulaney, our lpae? 21:04:02 j_dulaney: as in the Fedora kernel does? 21:04:15 Custom built one, but all stock 21:04:26 * j_dulaney hasn't tried the latest fedora lpae 21:04:34 as in, all mainline 21:04:51 * j_dulaney will try the latest lpae build 21:05:02 j_dulaney: not much use to general use, sorry, I would love a diff of what's needed, or the .config to get that booting kernel 21:05:58 j_dulaney: send me the .config too 21:06:24 j_dulaney: I'll help to diff with the lpae... make it easier on Peter 21:06:30 anything else for the kernel? 21:06:54 masta: grab the config generated in the lpae kernel and use that as a base 21:07:05 pwhalen: nope, I don't think so 21:07:14 #topic 5) Open Floor 21:07:16 masta: I'll email it your way post-meeting 21:07:26 if anyone had any idea as to the crashes in both tegra and highbank I would love some feedback on that 21:07:38 #info Trimslice now working with firmware v2012.04-1.02 (1 GB RAM now available) 21:07:39 #link http://www.trimslice.com/wiki/index.php/Trim-Slice_Firmware_Updater#U-Boot_environment_variable 21:08:00 pwhalen: stage4 bootstrap wiki pointer? 21:08:38 #info initial stage4 bootstrap Quickstart page 21:08:48 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/AArch64/QuickStart 21:09:06 #info this includes kernels for use with a disk image or nfs root 21:09:31 please have a look, try it out and let me know if I missed anything.. the last part will be to add the bootstrap instructions 21:09:42 We'll have a final stage4 rootfs really soon- like later today or tomorrow 21:10:06 as it is now, mock will work but will require an edit of the config to disable the stage4 repo until its available 21:10:16 * j_dulaney notes that the filesystem from last week didn't boot without tweaking 21:10:17 Once it's ready we can fill in the 'Getting Started with the Aarch64 Bootstrap' section 21:10:42 #info recommend usage with an NFS root 21:10:54 j_dulaney: Would you send any feedback to the mailing list? That way we can make sure people don't have to rediscover fixes 21:11:09 j_dulaney, with a disk image? 21:11:22 It wasn't a disk image, just filesystem 21:11:48 bconoboy: I'll try the new disk image and see if I still have issues 21:11:55 worked okay as is for me with an nfs root, or the disk image 21:11:59 pbrobinson: highbank dma related crashes may be related to still another bug in that subsystem (don't dereference NULL pointers!) 21:12:00 thanks 21:12:25 probinson: but i haven't had a chance to look at Paul's latest stuff and won't before Friday. 21:12:28 bconoboy: I had to manually populate /dev 21:12:35 mlangsdorf, thanks 21:13:00 No biggy, I have a script to do that, but still, just note that it happened 21:13:13 I'd have thought udev would populate /dev 21:13:35 bconoboy: Not the first time I've had udev not doing it's job in aarch64 21:13:44 Hence writing the script 21:14:26 anything else for the meeting, or shall we move it to #fedora-arm? 21:14:29 I'll poke some and if needed, file a bug report 21:15:30 #endmeeting