Arm-dev May 2016

arm-dev@lists.centos.org

14 participants
20 discussions

Gigabyte MP30-AR0
by Gordan Bobic 03 Oct '25

03 Oct '25

Hi, I am toying with the idea of getting a Gigabyte MP30-AR0 board (despite the insanely exorbitant price tag). Has anyone got the aarch64 CentOS working on one of those? Any special instructions? Also, if I get the ISO, is it bootable on aarch64? Does the installer work? Or does the image have to be used like on 32-bit ARM? Thanks. Gordan

17 207

Kernel for BananaPi R1 (Lamobo R1)
by mo.ucina 12 May '17

12 May '17

Hello Guys, I have been compiling the Fedora 4.4.2-300 kernel for Centos , using the new Centos image for the Banana-pi . I have used the Fedora src rpm and then added the patch for the switch drivers specific for R1 (Lamobo R1) , then compiled it within the Centos dev arm environment I have . I ran into a couple of things : one cosmetic , the other one not so . Firstly the cosmetic one is that my packages came out looking like this : -rw-rw-r-- 1 user user 49332 Feb 26 07:27 kernel-4.4.2-300.LR1.el7.centos.armv7hl.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 1 user user 87721969 Feb 26 07:27 kernel-4.4.2-300.LR1.el7.centos.src.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 1 user user 18785384 Feb 26 07:29 kernel-core-4.4.2-300.LR1.el7.centos.armv7hl.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 1 user user 10452672 Feb 26 07:30 kernel-devel-4.4.2-300.LR1.el7.centos.armv7hl.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 1 user user 1012496 Feb 26 07:27 kernel-headers-4.4.2-300.LR1.el7.centos.armv7hl.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 1 user user 11844188 Feb 26 07:31 kernel-modules-4.4.2-300.LR1.el7.centos.armv7hl.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 1 user user 925980 Feb 26 07:31 kernel-modules-extra-4.4.2-300.LR1.el7.centos.armv7hl.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 1 user user 105452 Feb 26 07:27 kernel-tools-4.4.2-300.LR1.el7.centos.armv7hl.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 1 user user 65356 Feb 26 07:27 kernel-tools-libs-4.4.2-300.LR1.el7.centos.armv7hl.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 1 user user 52160 Feb 26 07:27 kernel-tools-libs-devel-4.4.2-300.LR1.el7.centos.armv7hl.rpm They all have "centos" as part of the name , which I did not expect . I did not get that when compiling in Fedora. How do you remove that ? Second observation , a one that is a bit of a concern is that , after installing the new kernel I am missing bits : user@bananapi /boot $ ls -l total 43611 drwxr-xr-x. 5 root root 1024 Feb 25 22:21 38f5ec9e217b471e8adee477d933f640 -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 171924 Nov 26 00:43 config-4.2.3-200.el7.armv7hl drwxr-xr-x. 2 root root 15360 Dec 3 14:37 dtb-4.2.3-200.el7.armv7hl drwxr-xr-x. 2 root root 1024 Dec 3 14:47 extlinux drwxr-xr-x. 2 root root 1024 Jan 1 1970 grub -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 34922581 Dec 3 14:46 initramfs-4.2.3-200.el7.armv7hl.img -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 592347 Dec 3 14:37 initrd-plymouth.img drwxr-xr-x. 3 root root 1024 Dec 3 14:44 loader drwx------. 2 root root 12288 Dec 3 14:31 lost+found -rw-------. 1 root root 2879429 Nov 26 00:43 System.map-4.2.3-200.el7.armv7hl -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 5866104 Nov 26 00:43 vmlinuz-4.2.3-200.el7.armv7hl I expected that I would be missing 'initramfs' as the install prog is still work-in-progress. And I was prepared to create it with dracut . However I did not expect not to be missing all the other bits such as : config , dtb, system.map, vmlinuz . I did find my new kernel it was in that dir with a hex name : user@bananapi /boot $ ls -l 38f5ec9e217b471e8adee477d933f640/* 38f5ec9e217b471e8adee477d933f640/0-rescue: total 40652 -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 35427302 Dec 3 14:43 initrd -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 6033128 Feb 25 22:26 linux 38f5ec9e217b471e8adee477d933f640/4.2.3-200.el7.armv7hl: total 39995 -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 34923169 Dec 3 14:40 initrd -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 5866104 Dec 3 14:44 linux 38f5ec9e217b471e8adee477d933f640/4.4.2-300.LR1.el7.centos.armv7hl: total 41061 -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 35844934 Feb 25 22:24 initrd -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 6033128 Feb 25 22:36 linux So my question is how do I go from these 2 files above , to the situation where I can boot into the new kernel 4.4.2-300.LR1.el7.centos.armv7hl . Best Regards Milorad PS Once I have verified that the switch driver works , I will post it here .

5 13

I2C in Centos 7
by cjvijf＠gmail.com 29 Jan '17

29 Jan '17

Hello, I am running Centos on a raspberry pi 2b. (I downloaded the image from: http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/armv7hl/rpi2/images/ rpi2-centos-image.img.xz ) and installed the i2c libraries and modules for i2c. [root@rpi2-2 ~]# lsmod | grep i2c i2c_bcm2708 5006 0 i2c_dev 6027 0 From what I read that should be correct device file is there too: crw------- 1 root root 89, 1 Dec 31 1969 i2c-1 kernel: Linux rpi2-2 3.18.14-v7+ #794 SMP PREEMPT Sun Jun 7 12:50:51 BST 2015 armv7l armv7l armv7l GNU/Linux However, when I scan the i2c bus with 'i2cdetect -y 1' I don't see any devices (and I tried 2 that I know work). is the I2C stuff in this kernel working? (or is there a newer kernel version?) thanks, Ron P.S. I know this is an arm-dev list, but figured the I2C topic would fit better here than in a general Centos list

2 1

Wrong permissions on /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts
by (GalaxyMaster) 31 May '16

31 May '16

Hello, I'm new here and I'm quite happy to discover that there is an effort to port CentOS 7 to ARM. I've just downloaded the image, put it onto the card and booted up my Pi3 from it. The following I noticed right away: === [root@centos-rpi3 ~]# rpm -V initscripts .....UG.. /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts [root@centos-rpi3 ~]# ls -ld /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts drwxr-xr-x. 2 1000 1000 4096 Nov 27 16:23 /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts [root@centos-rpi3 ~]# chown -h root:root /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts [root@centos-rpi3 ~]# rpm -V initscripts [root@centos-rpi3 ~]# === It is still my first 10 minutes with Pi3 and CentOS 7 on it, but given my background I think I'll be a regular here and would able to contribute from Ops and InfoSec perspective, if there is such need. For example, I think we can do much better in terms of a minimal CentOS 7 and we should be able to enforce SELinux. I'm going investigate on both and once I'm ready I will share :) P.S. In any case, I'm very grateful for all your effort for bringing this project to life! -- (GM)

3 8

unofficial EPEL package builds
by Jim Perrin 25 May '16

25 May '16

I know quite a few of you (myself included) have been waiting for EPEL to support some of the additional architectures like AArch64. We've been working with the EPEL team to try to help this along, but it looks like the earliest this will be available is around late August. Until then, we're producing an unofficial build based on the SRPMs pulled from the fedora/EPEL mirrors. This is meant as a temporary "use at your own risk" set of packages. They are unsigned, and the repository isn't checked for dependency closure. Once the official EPEL repository is available, we will stop maintaining this branch. If I haven't scared you off yet, you can use this temporary repository by creating an unofficial.repo file in /etc/yum.repos.d with the following contents: [unofficial-builds] name=CentOS unofficial extra package rebuild baseurl=http://buildlogs.centos.org/c7-epel.a64/ metadata_expire=6h gpgcheck=0 skip_if_unavailable=True If you find a missing package, or are interested in helping to improve the packages, there's an associated bugzilla at https://bugzilla.redhat.com//show_bug.cgi?id=1285484 Please start there, or discuss/contribute here on the arm-dev(a)centos.org mailing list. -- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77

4 4

Re: [Arm-dev] Raspberry Pi3 kernel (Was: Wrong permissions on /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts)
by (GalaxyMaster) 24 May '16

24 May '16

Fabian, On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 10:05 PM, Fabian Arrotin <arrfab(a)centos.org> wrote: > On 21/05/16 09:57, (GalaxyMaster) wrote: > I guess we can rebuild the kernel by changing the initial patch then. Yes, this is exactly what I did to confirm that SELinux is indeed usable. > I also had a quick look at the rpi kernel source tree and it seems they > rebased to 4.4.x so wondering if that's not a good time to also bump to > that release. Yes, they made the rpi-4.4.y branch to be their main branch. I also compared the difference between rpi and kernel.org branches and the effort required to backport this to the current CentOS7 upstream kernel. Although it is not huge (around 10MB of patches) it would require a week of my time to do so and I don't have a week right now. So I guess I'm fine with using rpi-* as upstream for now. Additionally, I looked at the spec file for the kernel we are building and it's a bit dirty (e.g. it does some post-install tweaking and creates files which are not tracked by the package management). I am going to create a kernel package with the latest kernel from rpi-4.4.y with a cleaner spec file. Will share a link to my GitHub repository once it's done. > To answer your question about el7 default : it doesn't support armhfp by > default (as there is no upstream EL7 kernel for this) , and even el7 > aarch64 deviates from the 3.10.0 kernel. I am fully aware of how RedHat maintains their stable kernel trees and of their backport strategy. What I meant was that if we want to be as close as possible to CentOS7 we should have taken the upstream package from EL7 and applied the armhfp support on top of it. Anyway, as I mentioned above, it's a full week work and I don't have enough time to do it right now. > That's also the reason why we call the armhfp release "CentOS 7 > userland", because kernel differs from the CentOS 7 x86_64 (see > https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/AltArch/Arm32#head-447eb2193fd…) Thanks for the link (once we rebuild Pi3 kernel with the adjusted value we could update SELinux status on that page). -- (GM)

3 2

[question] CentOS 7 Installer ISO generating
by Lomovtsev, Vadim 24 May '16

24 May '16

Hi all, With the original ISO and updated kernel using VA length set to 48 bits we got an issue wit polkitd crash because of mozjs can't work with 48 bits VA. There is an open bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1143022 but there are not much updates. So I applied patch for mozjs, recreate rpm and tested it - works well, no crashes observed. For my setup I need to have it installed automatically at system deployment phase using installer ISO. Now every time I need to update mozjs rpm manually along with kernel rpm. I've tried to repack existing ISO with my rpms (updating packages repository) but in this case anaconda fails to proceed installation due to rpms signing checks of something like that. It looks like I need to recreate whole ISO from scratch, or properly update repodata for packages (simple createrepo is not enough) isn't it? I believe that I need to use CentOS deployed at armv8 system and use lorax to create an ISO , is that right or it could be built in cross-compiler environment? We also will need to add some extra packages for KVM support and this could help us also. WBR, Vadim

3 8

WiFi firmware
by (GalaxyMaster) 24 May '16

24 May '16

All, Is there a reason why the firmware binary for the WiFi driver is not included into the kernel-firmware package? The reason I'm asking is that initially I thought there is a licensing issue, but I've checked the license and there are no issues there. Also the same license covers the following binary we are installing: === [root@centos-rpi3 ~]# ls -l /lib/firmware/brcm/brcmfmac43455-sdio.bin -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 488193 Nov 20 2015 /lib/firmware/brcm/brcmfmac43455-sdio.bin [root@centos-rpi3 ~]# rpm -qf /lib/firmware/brcm/brcmfmac43455-sdio.bin linux-firmware-20150904-43.git6ebf5d5.el7.noarch [root@centos-rpi3 ~]# === I'll try to update the linux-firmware repository [http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-firmware.git/tre…] with the firmware for our chip, however, I guess it would be quite a long process, so I suggest to temporarily build a sub-package (say, linux-firmware-brcmfmac43430) out of our kernel SRPM, so users would get WiFi out of the box. What do you think? -- (GM)

2 3

Gnome or KDE on Centos
by Seth Stevenson 23 May '16

23 May '16

I know some were looking into installing a gui for the raspberry pi. I havn't found any instructions on how to do it. Is it possible, and has anyone done it? Thanks for your help. -- Seth Stevenson

1 0

Re: [Arm-dev] aarch64 internal compiler error
by Mark Verlinde 23 May '16

23 May '16

Glad to report; the thing that concerns me: There is no problem building a vanilla samba with (centos 7) gcc 4.85 on armv7lh nor x86_64. It fails on aarch64. I don't use the fedora sprm, that's just a simple way to reproduce. Anyway, i am sorted out.; it could very well be a personal quirck of my setup. Thanx for bringing centos to aarch64! > > Thanks for the heads-up on this. The fedora folks will sometimes have > toolchain expectations built or patched into their src.rpms so this > isn't entirely unusual, however it's quite possible that the samba folks > have expectations and it would require patching to use an older gcc. > > On 05/19/2016 04:55 PM, Mark Verlinde wrote: > > hello, > > > > To spin up a nspawn container with a vanilla samba as an ad-dc controller I had a go on compiling samba latest stable. Building a vanilla samba 4.4.3 for aarch64 does not succeed due to an internal compiler error. > > > > I know I ‘am swimming on my own here, still severe enough to share it on this list. > > Especially as it builds just fine on X86_64 and armv7hfp – and- > > succeeded to build it against Centos 7 with ggc 5.1.1 form fedora repository’s. > > > > Building on an Odriod C2 running on a “debian” 3.14.67 kernel > > > > (part of) Build log using standard gcc 4.8.5: > > ../source3/smbd/notify.c: In function 'change_notify_create': > > ../source3/smbd/notify.c:297:1: internal compiler error: in fixup_reorder_chain, at cfgrtl.c:3336 > > > > Simplest way to reproduce is building samba 4.3.0-0.1.rc4 from fedora sources: > > http://ftp.nluug.nl/ftp/pub/os/Linux/distr/fedora/linux/releases/23/Everyth… > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Arm-dev mailing list > > Arm-dev(a)centos.org > > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev > > > > -- > Jim Perrin > The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org > twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 > _______________________________________________ > Arm-dev mailing list > Arm-dev(a)centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev >

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

Arm-dev May 2016