[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Feedback from the community -> ARM

On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 04:43:44PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Hello,
> next week there is a (virtual) meeting at ARM who invited some people
> involved in Linux on ARM CPUs. One of the topics there is to tell them
> Debian's needs and pain points.
> My current list (based on own experience and asking for feedback in
> #debian-arm) currently has:
>  - Fragmentation
>    - Vendor kernels vs. mainline
>      This got better in the past is my subjective impression, but it
>      still hurts. Device tree made this a tad simpler, but it's not
>      unusual to have vendor specific bindings.
>    - early boot code
>      U-Boot (or general: bootloader) is device specific and more often
>      than not there is only a Vendor variant available.
>      Also today there are more relevant components: ATF, UEFI/EDK2
>    Vendors care at different intensities (and profit from external
>    developers) Would Arm Base System Architecture (BSA) help? (This is
>    only for AArch64 though, arm32 still relevant for us.)
>  - relevant SoC/SBC vendors:
>    - Allwinner
>    - Broadcom / RaspberryPi Foundation
>    - Marvell
>    - NXP
>    - Odroid
>    - Rockchip
>    - some more for sure (which?)
>  - Graphics
>    Similar problematic, vendor blobs vs. OSS
> Is there anything on your mind that is missing above and that you'd like to
> be shared with ARM? Feel free to reply here or discuss in #debian-arm. (I'm
> ukleinek there.)
> Best regards
> Uwe

Just get _someone_ to make a good quality 64 bit server which doesn't cost
the earth and works well with UEFI and relatively standard interfaces
and components.

AMD were doing this n years ago but the devices never got popular/cheap
enough for use. Marvell have the espressobin and macchiatobin - just 
get something that looks like a performant mini-ATX / itx board and
can run forever at low power but in a standard form factor.

Andy C.

Reply to: