[Arm-dev] Raspberry Pi3 kernel (Was: Wrong permissions on /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts)

[Fabian Arrotin]

On 22/05/16 04:36, (GalaxyMaster) wrote:
> Fabian,
> 
> On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 10:05 PM, Fabian Arrotin <arrfab at 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.

Cool, thanks a lot for the offer. Let us know when something is ready.
I can also try to bump it on my side too in the mean time (but only a
sysadmin here, not a developer)

> 
>> 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-447eb2193fd92db5a65be9cae5a6f95c3546605b)
> 
> Thanks for the link (once we rebuild Pi3 kernel with the adjusted
> value we could update SELinux status on that page).
> 

Yes, I confirm that it works fine with just that change . I rebooted my
rpi3 node with the test kernel files hosted here for now :
http://armv7.dev.centos.org/repodir/arm-kernels/rpi2-4.1.19-2/
(Just a rebuild of previous srpm but with the  modified patch for selinux)


-- 
Fabian Arrotin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
gpg key: 56BEC54E | twitter: @arrfab

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/arm-dev/attachments/20160523/039a789b/attachment.sig>