From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Mar 12 19:18:54 2025 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Mar 2025 23:18:54 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52250 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tsVLi-0005Wr-5Y for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2025 19:18:54 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:470:142::17]:54022) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tsVLg-0005Wc-7C for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2025 19:18:52 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tsVLY-0003w9-B4 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2025 19:18:46 -0400 Received: from cascadia.aikidev.net ([2600:3c01:e000:267:0:a171:de7:c]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tsVLV-00087j-L5 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2025 19:18:43 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=debian.org; s=1.vagrant.user; t=1741821511; bh=2VrfdCFxlxkY6hFDnWl89p/am73K4gsxlAIYpqex0RE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From; b=lNE4JwzOzwGTL+XRt9RBlGpAGGNoGr/fX25oPR9PFSiwZvtyntYmINnShyHUuuY6o lyfNN6CXFHy+WWxO2Sumgfz8ArlZCfKS271UeFaIgt0KbXiVHcdv7lOvbdHeWWCncH zgoWE9jUCaLDSxN0w50fVPvGYmwjtUrHgerKKpczOAhAWiFF5l0MVDIsUYbDl8Xeck oNuDOV/2oBl9+kElh6YG4hb7y1XpcW8LUoSnP5wCzqC0bBPLbzq9rxSvhPAY0rBEhx 7HHCLozjhuAb+gquDE1jt5eUf5EDYYheK6upeNaKA9ALY9ziojHo+boFyWz2BsTrCH h1Md5d0D82Lcg== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2600:3c01:e000:21:7:77:0:50]) by cascadia.aikidev.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 44E54911; Wed, 12 Mar 2025 16:18:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Vagrant Cascadian To: bug-guix@gnu.org Subject: Architecture-specific kernels (arm64-generic) built for x86_64 Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2025 16:18:26 -0700 Message-ID: <87y0x9zvlp.fsf@wireframe> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Received-SPF: none client-ip=2600:3c01:e000:267:0:a171:de7:c; envelope-from=vagrant@debian.org; helo=cascadia.aikidev.net X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: w@wmeyer.eu, leo@famulari.name X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In trying to create an alternate kernel configuration, I noticed that the various kernels on x86_64 that are targeted at various specific architectures (e.g. linux-libre-arm64-generic) ... are actually built for X86_64: $ file $(guix build linux-libre-arm64-generic)/bzImage gnu/packages/linux.scm:989:2: warning: package linux-libre-arm64-generic@= 6.13.6 does not support x86_64-linux /gnu/store/2jj1jxirrgiq972xbfk8cz8b9i642qq5-linux-libre-arm64-generic-6.1= 3.6/bzImage: Linux kernel x86 boot executable bzImage, version 6.13.6-arm64= -generic (guix@guix) #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC 1, RO-rootFS, swap_dev 0XF, Nor= mal VGA =20=20 $ grep ^CONFIG_X86_64=3D $(guix build linux-libre-arm64-generic)/.config gnu/packages/linux.scm:989:2: warning: package linux-libre-arm64-generic@= 6.13.6 does not support x86_64-linux CONFIG_X86_64=3Dy Those were downloaded from the substitute servers... and guix even helpfully warns me that something is fishy... so it is not like I was holding it wrong, per se! :) These packages should either refuse to build (e.g. it does not match the architecture, so should not even try to build) or attempt to cross build when building on a non-native architecture. I swear they used to cross-build for the appropriate architecture on x86_64 out-of-the box ages ago, but there have been probably significant changes to how cross-compilation and/or linux-libre packaging is done since then... $ git grep -E 'define-public linux-libre.*(generic|honey|mips|arm)' gnu/p= ackages/linux.scm | nl 1 gnu/packages/linux.scm:(define-public linux-libre-arm-generic 2 gnu/packages/linux.scm:(define-public linux-libre-arm-generic-5.10 3 gnu/packages/linux.scm:(define-public linux-libre-arm-generic-5.4 4 gnu/packages/linux.scm:(define-public linux-libre-arm-omap2plus 5 gnu/packages/linux.scm:(define-public linux-libre-arm64-generic 6 gnu/packages/linux.scm:(define-public linux-libre-lts-arm64-generic 7 gnu/packages/linux.scm:(define-public linux-libre-arm64-generic-5.10 8 gnu/packages/linux.scm:(define-public linux-libre-arm64-generic-5.4 9 gnu/packages/linux.scm:(define-public linux-libre-arm64-honeycomb 10 gnu/packages/linux.scm:(define-public linux-libre-riscv64-generic 11 gnu/packages/linux.scm:(define-public linux-libre-mips64el-fuloong2e Building all those package variants is a waste of build resources when the result is not usable for the intended purpose... Thanks for maintaining linux-libre in Guix! :) live well, vagrant --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEARYKAB0WIQRlgHNhO/zFx+LkXUXcUY/If5cWqgUCZ9IWQgAKCRDcUY/If5cW qswHAQCCxbojqzuIGpA2XmfhXIZKG6dTQCxrE4xe3VuQI/3lfgEAoU+TTWj30lO9 PB+nkdFmh4x/UjAYq1pX2B+hQdK7Ngw= =k6tU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Mar 14 15:10:36 2025 Received: (at 76988) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Mar 2025 19:10:36 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36281 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ttAQV-0000CE-TE for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2025 15:10:36 -0400 Received: from fhigh-a4-smtp.messagingengine.com ([103.168.172.155]:38811) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ttAQS-0000Bv-Tx for 76988@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2025 15:10:34 -0400 Received: from phl-compute-10.internal (phl-compute-10.phl.internal [10.202.2.50]) by mailfhigh.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15FE011401B4; Fri, 14 Mar 2025 15:10:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-mailfrontend-02 ([10.202.2.163]) by phl-compute-10.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 14 Mar 2025 15:10:27 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=famulari.name; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=mesmtp; t=1741979427; x= 1742065827; bh=SvL5ePwo9txzTU5aOeGmREcgddYU+hSw0I9W7jtGX8Y=; b=h CgPg4YcPUkkVootO066kpGzKo8O+A1FiHO8jBpZ4Med4+OnQlrvnRdqeS835a5Nj FfFVk3OfGHh4DkVjf9+uV4iHBUI1XUgukTT0kzxn/d5hw5zEREvjEucCF1EFoPIP kcgPmIBKkiG4eSRBX32jkvcd9tZsf273QU7k/Ly2sQ= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t= 1741979427; x=1742065827; bh=SvL5ePwo9txzTU5aOeGmREcgddYU+hSw0I9 W7jtGX8Y=; b=R1Sg41Y8PRQcbhq/K8t5i/DczkqNZxUWcfS9PKAc07YQBMscbO0 O2pb0RmOqEZuJ1Uwxyh4+SnVMAFIWA+tNq5Zyol7RhDESIjN/h7C28Ch7etzp8tT zai+zVCKGgcAeFMP3iIV89g//xeUnJLKsTylfNusONJ9XlevQDxqBePTBrjk/rZN XmvbukNWYpEWIy34Q9+aqB+gDFDzB7MSINPJ2WCGukyPimPbcLynB0cwAGuA09vv oiQmd8AMu/59lWLfbssaNPpH8sM2wrNDHamBNLyykkosD4dsaQNsaKe059eDkhlg Y9JMNsiJHbgEk418Ox4kAx3LVG9onsSNYxA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefvddrtddtgddufeduieefucetufdoteggodetrf dotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggv pdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpih gvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhepfffhvfevuffkfhggtggujgesthdtredttddt vdenucfhrhhomhepnfgvohcuhfgrmhhulhgrrhhiuceolhgvohesfhgrmhhulhgrrhhird hnrghmvgeqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepieetudehfeekueefleegudfhjefgleehfeel uefhfeffgfeuudelhedvjeelieetnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrg hmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheplhgvohesfhgrmhhulhgrrhhirdhnrghmvgdpnhgspghrtghp thhtohepfedpmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghpthhtohepvhgrghhrrghnthesug gvsghirghnrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtohepjeeileekkeesuggvsggsuhhgshdrghhnuhdr ohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopeifseifmhgvhigvrhdrvghu X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i819c4023:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 14 Mar 2025 15:10:26 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 15:10:25 -0400 From: Leo Famulari To: Vagrant Cascadian Subject: Re: Architecture-specific kernels (arm64-generic) built for x86_64 Message-ID: References: <87y0x9zvlp.fsf@wireframe> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87y0x9zvlp.fsf@wireframe> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 76988 Cc: w@wmeyer.eu, 76988@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) Thanks for pointing this out! I don't do anything regarding the "generic" arm64 kernels, so I also don't know how they work or why they are built in any particular way. Here's a crude command to produce a list of interesting changes to the linux-libre packaging: `git log v1.4.0..HEAD --grep linux-libre --oneline | grep -v Update | grep -v "Remove linux-libre" | grep -v "Add linux-libre" | grep -v "news:"` I hope that the arm64 / aarch64 users can get them working properly! And I invite them to join the kernel team and help out in the future too! From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Mar 17 06:53:04 2025 Received: (at 76988) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Mar 2025 10:53:05 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55984 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tu85f-0003gk-Aa for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 06:53:04 -0400 Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]:42685) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tu85b-0003fC-KK for 76988@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 06:53:01 -0400 Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB6D9240027 for <76988@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 11:52:51 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1742208771; bh=4UDpjv3kGkb0eh3tuE4Kwu6kr6jXbf1v/dFCqOQI40g=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:From:To:Cc:Subject:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:From; b=DbiHLP7SkzxoqhGo9okXTZ+GPbeLoW147NaAhJCcQv4WOqTSIDTagVJZZ2xLuYwXO 7544f+4KI2p9xKB+h3v2XCxCOElkswV4byu6J38W7B7MYApc1hpP3mLZ4O+zLZR/oz ne1spjDLnlW0enPfOgJXPZDhyBJklDN6oCe8giyewSaR0rIrssC8GWnPUXLmvqaAqM cQI8qnCKyBtk6JzIENzL89Zg4xndC43OpJK22nXNDc/wW5quHx0nW7nhWbG8l5CAtB iIt9VJH7dAHP9+IxoTMFcRVECjTZO/6aPBRoSUXaZPkBTi/ncVAksrdpSU5zF3jQiG 1nvDemve/6CJQ== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4ZGWyn0vMFz9rxG; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 11:52:49 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 10:52:46 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Language: en-US From: Dariqq To: Vagrant Cascadian Subject: bug#76988: Architecture-specific kernels (arm64-generic) built for, x86_64 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 76988 Cc: w@wmeyer.eu, 76988@debbugs.gnu.org, Leo Famulari X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -4.3 (----) Hello Vagrant, This looks to me like a problem with cuirass (or cuirass settings). The packages are marked as unsupported correctly, e.g. the arm64-generic kenel should only support aarch64-linux (as can be seen by the warning). However the ci server attempts to build it for all architectures. I searched for linux-libre-arm64-generic-6.13.7 on the cuirass interface on ci.g.g.o and there were builds for i686-linux, x86_64_linux, powerpc64le-linux and aarch64-linux As the x86_64 build succeeds it then serves the substitute to someone asking for it. Specifying either --system=aarch64-linux or --target=aarch64-linux-gnu gave me a substitute corresponding to a native/cross built arm64 kernel. file $(guix build linux-libre-arm64-generic --target=aarch64-linux-gnu)/Image /gnu/store/*linux-libre-arm64-generic-6.13.7/Image: Linux kernel ARM64 boot executable Image, little-endian, 4K pages From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Mar 17 12:49:43 2025 Received: (at 76988) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Mar 2025 16:49:43 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60564 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tuDen-0000az-Dy for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 12:49:42 -0400 Received: from cascadia.aikidev.net ([173.255.214.101]:49274) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tuDej-0000a3-H8 for 76988@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 12:49:38 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=debian.org; s=1.vagrant.user; t=1742230169; bh=4IGgr10317httT6MgiAXnFtYXLUGSjIPGezhP3wSrLk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=cqXvKCzsqmihvNTNw9kL1ZF8xEwXf98dMvsBL1jSuUKoMGTEQI9xsGGJzg0EifqYX yXiRV+5o2dBn1pyAGq7zNj5se+j0dB2MYDm9jZONBiA5nWHKSjCusagiAnVZWRF1EI dlsKiT5nZwl5PagfPDOetdfmZ1tdzGjgpADBuKn3zw/jbkja0Lbkh+O6d9Uo6H4rSY K2Iurrjxez+17GnRc83LvOhgw/hT01GObBi/G7Z5sm0c10KLVt7sR5zmD0biX66rhG CiNfX4zuTfd2ivYFp/2kbV548x1HpLkvmS+Q6baeggGpxW0mJykID2iyLKNta1GBeQ jNVBuDqlBQB1Q== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2600:3c01:e000:21:7:77:0:50]) by cascadia.aikidev.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A68EF86F; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 09:49:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Vagrant Cascadian To: Dariqq Subject: Re: bug#76988: Architecture-specific kernels (arm64-generic) built for, x86_64 In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 09:49:23 -0700 Message-ID: <87h63rmwks.fsf@wireframe> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 76988 Cc: w@wmeyer.eu, 76988@debbugs.gnu.org, Leo Famulari X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2025-03-17, Dariqq wrote: > This looks to me like a problem with cuirass (or cuirass settings). > The packages are marked as unsupported correctly, e.g. the arm64-generic= =20 > kenel should only support aarch64-linux (as can be seen by the warning). > However the ci server attempts to build it for all architectures. It is definitely not specific to cuirass, as I only noticed it with "guix build" of a custom package that would not possibly have substitutes, and only later checked the substitute servers (ci.guix.gnu.org, bordeax.guix.gnu.org) to see that they had the same problem... > I searched for linux-libre-arm64-generic-6.13.7 on the cuirass=20 > interface on ci.g.g.o and there were builds for > i686-linux, x86_64_linux, powerpc64le-linux and > aarch64-linux > > As the x86_64 build succeeds it then serves the substitute to someone=20 > asking for it. > > Specifying either --system=3Daarch64-linux or --target=3Daarch64-linux-gn= u=20 > gave me a substitute corresponding to a native/cross built arm64 kernel. > > file $(guix build linux-libre-arm64-generic=20 > --target=3Daarch64-linux-gnu)/Image > /gnu/store/*linux-libre-arm64-generic-6.13.7/Image: Linux kernel ARM64=20 > boot executable Image, little-endian, 4K pages That is consistent with what I observed too! live well, vagrant --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEARYKAB0WIQRlgHNhO/zFx+LkXUXcUY/If5cWqgUCZ9hSlAAKCRDcUY/If5cW qtooAQCd96pCt/zqOE/lX4G9TiF4Jjwi2a6fqyRQxuLk0T9olwD/adM0pTaobD9j NG3sxktwi2seJ2WcqXxuam3SohWNQAo= =/6eM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Mar 21 15:29:32 2025 Received: (at 76988) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Mar 2025 19:29:32 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39584 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tvi3g-0007cI-1R for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 21 Mar 2025 15:29:32 -0400 Received: from cascadia.aikidev.net ([173.255.214.101]:60674) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tvi3e-0007bv-3O for 76988@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 21 Mar 2025 15:29:30 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=debian.org; s=1.vagrant.user; t=1742585361; bh=LVxIR/gGPWznYmDJ7U1cFwaqiDONsDGe/atUb6rACCI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=Y6aAyABxAPpLrw/5364+E9d8Md/voU59NwslyLj8rN3bUtJLFRNFkHMdk7JBEpf3Y iS2RallKddEfGsEM1bmnTT/GygvXzq+1VszoUCqeI9wmi+p25ThECK/HwXkOiXndjy fUDXBm1w4KErGy9QVEh4Hx9ohYx/tloVzkGUCVO72hodkRcRNDK2BtXC63myh1auvW GRsupOM0bLEb6WTZlVuODweBiREhM/0rOSJgpygFEfgl9slTo04loMWAWUIBBL0Ngc 4GBEAeXVIGBqH7OPzlojCpN+2PyGZnfVmbqZTr85QUsAVHkeBZW/J7lvTy0CKtHvRs S/2Q3fvPggSqg== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2600:3c01:e000:21:7:77:0:50]) by cascadia.aikidev.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 32043269B; Fri, 21 Mar 2025 12:29:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Vagrant Cascadian To: Leo Famulari Subject: Re: Architecture-specific kernels (arm64-generic) built for x86_64 In-Reply-To: References: <87y0x9zvlp.fsf@wireframe> Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2025 12:29:16 -0700 Message-ID: <87sen6ji7n.fsf@wireframe> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 76988 Cc: w@wmeyer.eu, 76988@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain On 2025-03-14, Leo Famulari wrote: > I don't do anything regarding the "generic" arm64 kernels, so I also > don't know how they work or why they are built in any particular way. Yeah, in most cases I would prefer to use the regular linux-libre package, but sometimes it is difficult to follow the module name changes to hard-code the appropriate list of initrd modules to find the rootfs, and some of these kernel variants make that easier by using some =y options that might reasonably be =m options in "linux-libre", and also might allow patches that are not appropriate to apply to the standard "linux-libre" packages (e.g. linux-libre-arm64-mnt-reform in bug#77090). Or just include options that are only particular to a particular platform, but cannot be made modules for one reason or another... anyways... :) I made a lazy attempt at forcing a build failure by ensuring the appropriate architecture was set in the configuration: #:extra-options (append + `(;; Ensure we are building for arm64 + ("CONFIG_ARM64" . #true) But the build still picks the wrong defconfig: *** Default configuration is based on 'x86_64_defconfig' I presume that the checks to make sure the configuration includes the options in #:extra-options must run before the config is generated with the wrongly selected defconfig... ?? Interestingly, linux-libre-arm-generic does usefully fail to build early on, but by pure luck: starting phase `set-environment' `ARCH' set to `x86_64' phase `set-environment' succeeded after 0.0 seconds starting phase `configure' HOSTCC scripts/basic/fixdep ... HOSTLD scripts/kconfig/conf *** *** Can't find default configuration "arch/x86/configs/multi_v7_defconfig"! Because it is setting ARCH to x86_64, and there is obviously no corresponding multi_v7_defconfig. For the arm64 linux-libre variants: #:defconfig "defconfig" So it happily picks arch/x86/configs/defconfig... If a custom linux-libre variant could force the ARCH value (based on supported-systems?), this just might work as desired... or at least usefully break earlier in the build, saving considerable build time! When cross-compiling, ARCH and CROSS_COMPILE are set appropriately: $ guix build --check --target=aarch64-linux-gnu linux-libre-arm64-generic ... starting phase `set-environment' `ARCH' set to `arm64' `CROSS_COMPILE' set to `aarch64-linux-gnu-' But the only option for linux-libre-arm64-generic is either native or cross compilation, since it is an aarch64-linux/arm64 specific package... we should be able to detect that somehow and at least fail the build early or ideally not even attempt the build if ARCH mismatches. Maybe somewhere in make-linux-libre* it could have a sanity check comparing "supported-systems" against the %current-target-system and %current-system? ;; Set ARCH and CROSS_COMPILE. (let ((arch #$(platform-linux-architecture (lookup-platform-by-target-or-system (or (%current-target-system) (%current-system)))))) (setenv "ARCH" arch) (format #t "`ARCH' set to `~a'~%" (getenv "ARCH")) (when target (setenv "CROSS_COMPILE" (string-append target "-")) (format #t "`CROSS_COMPILE' set to `~a'~%" (getenv "CROSS_COMPILE")))) Thanks for considering! live well, vagrant --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEARYKAB0WIQRlgHNhO/zFx+LkXUXcUY/If5cWqgUCZ92+DAAKCRDcUY/If5cW qrDTAP4npkOqFTbLHRspyGuSAGKtMWkn2lJNmMX7lcgsRJ93WAD/YfWtMpmvwWtn TpPRrFsXzCQMV6RagsHJW/rV7pHKXAE= =Jk5o -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Mar 21 19:24:58 2025 Received: (at 76988) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Mar 2025 23:24:58 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39964 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tvljV-00051K-Nw for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 21 Mar 2025 19:24:57 -0400 Received: from cascadia.aikidev.net ([2600:3c01:e000:267:0:a171:de7:c]:36044) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tvljT-000511-1s for 76988@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 21 Mar 2025 19:24:55 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=debian.org; s=1.vagrant.user; t=1742599487; bh=E9NPDo9Rp58n0Wog8I6adh7DFjFTB1RDcex7q/1UADU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=LcabrxVllx4+QnnIB4Y1AgtkZyIL9rpa6At95O1J65bjBfPhWv48CyZnXu3JoQyxB atnkxXA+LVGGnpiFlMgt83HoMElvUZ+XawbkX1e/RjbVjpYSmEz7rC55tzo6+TW40B UU4eeWBj0Hbl2Fic0ARYPTMviLWaMetD80vXQIQGRI1tDSnkaBf0tj8vLobobSKD7m X2DN/9/yGjoFAdHmR3AsoLAAP4ydrvGyAQG7gbtzE4W9/UjlgCOt+wDRI3K5z1Hcfj 0svmwDPs7slNegyl8+0yU2QubmMzhz0V2ENCeuoKZACFgCVSlg7VoNZyUTCk/yIeuG H57StwXbifxDg== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2600:3c01:e000:21:7:77:0:50]) by cascadia.aikidev.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E1BDE269B; Fri, 21 Mar 2025 16:24:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Vagrant Cascadian To: Leo Famulari Subject: Re: Architecture-specific kernels (arm64-generic) built for x86_64 In-Reply-To: <87sen6ji7n.fsf@wireframe> References: <87y0x9zvlp.fsf@wireframe> <87sen6ji7n.fsf@wireframe> Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2025 16:24:41 -0700 Message-ID: <87o6xuj7ba.fsf@wireframe> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 76988 Cc: w@wmeyer.eu, 76988@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2025-03-21, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > Maybe somewhere in make-linux-libre* it could have a sanity check > comparing "supported-systems" against the %current-target-system and > %current-system? This more-or-less does what I want: (use-modules (guix platform)) (use-modules (guix packages)) (use-modules (gnu packages linux)) (define arch "arm64") (define supported-systems (package-supported-systems linux-libre-arm64-generic)) (define linux-supported-systems (map (lambda (s) (platform-linux-architecture (lookup-platform-by-target-or-system = s))) supported-systems)) (if (member arch linux-supported-systems) (display arch) (display "BAD")) Manually adjusting arch to various values... But I fail in adding it as a phase to make-linux-libre*, as supported-supported systems is just defined as #f: (add-before 'unpack 'check-valid-arch (lambda* (#:key supported-systems #:allow-other-keys) (let ((arch #$(platform-linux-architecture (lookup-platform-by-target-or-system (or (%current-target-system) (%current-system)))))) (if (member arch (map (lambda (s) (platform-linux-architecture (lookup-platform-by-target-or-system s)= )) supported-systems)) (#true) (#false) )))) =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 Also not sure if #true or #false will allow the build to continue or fail the build here... but I am mostly generating syntax errors and tracebacks. live well, vagrant --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEARYKAB0WIQRlgHNhO/zFx+LkXUXcUY/If5cWqgUCZ931OQAKCRDcUY/If5cW qlncAQCdi+KOjAaZrxuECzhS/9XJUCVdCze+9LylOOfIqQ7dugEAmwb3IupqHH96 /F+ickmDhw899L4IX4YnU0uK1Uzk3AA= =R/0B -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--