Re: DSA concerns for jessie architectures (mips*)
On Sat, 22 Jun 2013, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * mips: existing machines are either not reliable or too slow to keep
> > up; we suspect that they may not be easily replaceable.
> Also, if we buy more mipsel machines we could convert the mipsel
> swarms to mips ones (and so replace broken machines, see below) -
> mostly depends on how urgent you think this is.
If our existing eight-year old hardware is the only mips machines we can
reasonably get then that doesn't bode well for mips. We don't think
relying on the SWARMs (alone) is an option.
> > * mipsel: the porter machine and some of the buildd machines have an
> > implementation error for one opcode; missing kernel in the archive
>
> Different answers - select the one you like most:
> 1. We could buy a some loongson 2f machines (or newer), see e.g.
> http://www.tekmote.nl/epages/61504599.sf/nl_NL/?ObjectPath=/Shops/61504599/Products/CFL-006
> plus some memory. These machines have kernels in the archive, and not
> the hardware bug with choking on too many nop-instructions in a row.
AIUI these machines have a maximum memory of only 1GB. That's probably
OK for now but might be problematic in the long term.
> 3. We have currently two new machines with loongson 3a processors to
> test. It will take a bit of time to finally get a working kernel on
> these, but that would also decrease build-times quite much.
When do you expect them to be usable?
If not any time soon then maybe we should try to get a couple of
loongson 2f machines. Would four machines of this type be sufficient to
replace all our exist swarm and 2e machines as buildds? If so, should
we just get 5 (4buildd+1porterbox)?
Cheers,
--
| .''`. ** Debian **
Peter Palfrader | : :' : The universal
http://www.palfrader.org/ | `. `' Operating System
| `- http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: