[Linaro-dev] Availability of hardware for Linaro development?
Pedro I. Sanchez
psanchez at fosstel.com
Sat Jun 5 23:38:22 BST 2010
On 10-06-05 03:59 PM, Joel Crisp wrote:
> Hi Robert
> This is an interesting offer, but it seems to be to almost be the wrong
> way around. AMD, Canonical among others are sponsoring Linaro; wouldn't
> it make more sense for them to throw a few thousand $ at a build farm
> somewhere and provide a work queue for that so that Linaro contributors
> could do farm based build and test? In terms of their daily expenditure
> it would be barely background noise. Provide some logins and some
> resource quotas, a few tens of JTAG connected boards of different types
> with a variety of peripherals rigged up and you have something sensible
> for development. After all, this initiative should ensure that they sell
> thousands more boards in the future. They should also be able to add
> samples of new product to the farm before general release.
> If it's to any use for you guys...
> I do have some of spare ARM cycles to spare to help push this combined
> ARM tree development work, if your looking for daily native build
> I am in the middle of adding 3 more new omap3 based nodes to my
> current build farm of 4 arm boards. (figure 1 a week-end, this is
> definitely in my spare time..)
> I currently have 1 BeagleBoard and 1 Sheevaplug dedicated to building
> kernels for my customers, and these are currently idling about 50%ish
> of the time during the week..
> And then I have another 2 Omap3 boards currently setup to do non-stop
> gcc trunk bootstrap and testsuite..
> My biggest problem is lack of bandwidth on my cable modem, so giving
> out of ssh access is pointless. But it would work fine as a build bot
> controlled thru the web...
> For reference, the slowest node in my system (500MHz 256MB Omap3)
> takes 5-6 hours to build a complete linux kernel with almost every
> possible module enabled...
> Robert Nelson
> Linaro-dev mailing list
> Linaro-dev at lists.linaro.org <mailto:Linaro-dev at lists.linaro.org>
I might be missing something, but why do we need an ARM-based build farm
to start with? What's wrong with setting up a bunch of cross-compilers
tuned up for the different CPUs and use x86 machines to build ARM
kernels? Finding spare x86 cycles shouldn't be a problem at all.
With time, resources, and hardware availability we could have an
ARM-only build farm, but I don't see that as a mandatory stage to go
through at this moment.
I would personally like as one of the outputs of the Linaro community to
standardize on a process to build ARM cross-compilers.
More information about the Linaro-dev