Hi, Il 16/06/2018 12:02, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo ha scritto: > As a rough estimate, qemu is about 20x times slower than modern > hardware. E.g. if the build takes 5 min in arm64, it takes 1h on one > of our buildds; if it takes 2h in arm64 that's two days in riscv64. Out of curiosity, how does this compare with the SiFive board? Also, why do you compare with arm64 in particular? Did you mean amd64? >> or get a native riscv board allocated for a buildd > Getting real HW is an expectation in the long term, specially if we > can use them to substitude all the qemu-system ones. > > Having a single board at this point for that not sure if > possible/feasible as a host part of the buildd set, I think, because > having too much difference in buildds can cause other sets of > problems. (It's not feasible/easy to divert packages to specific > buildds). Not that my opinion matters much, given that I began fiddling with riscv64 yesterday and will probably have little time in the future to do more, but if real hardware was available, I would consider using it (also) as a porterbox, given that human time is much more expensive than CPU time. Bye, Giovanni. -- Giovanni Mascellani <g.mascellani@gmail.com> Postdoc researcher - Université Libre de Bruxelles
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature