[Linaro-dev] Availability of hardware for Linaro development?
wmat at naoi.ca
Sun Jun 6 02:51:51 BST 2010
On 10-06-05 06:38 PM, Pedro I. Sanchez wrote:
> 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.
Would it not make more sense to simply standardize on a readily
available toolchain such as CodeSourcery's Lite ARM toolchain?
More information about the Linaro-dev