raspberry pi 4

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
33 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

raspberry pi 4

tech-lists
Hi,

Are there any plans on getting freebsd working on the rpi4? Or does it
already work? Or partly work?

thanks,
--
J.

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

freebsd-arm mailing list
I’m looking at it. The first problem is getting u-boot to work on the device.

Andrei Gherzan is also looking at u-boot support; his work is on his github account at agherzan. At the moment we’re both stuck trying to enable the MMU during board start up. So quite some distance to go yet.

On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 17:12, tech-lists <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Are there any plans on getting freebsd working on the rpi4? Or does it
> already work? Or partly work?
>
> thanks,
> --
> J.
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

Denis Polygalov
OMG,
people please please don't be fooled by RPi 3 or 4 or 44...
It is not in my or anyone's power to decide what FreeBSD arm community work on
but please let's enhance support of the good OS (FreeBSD)
on a *good* boards. Let's leave disaster OS to people who want
to fight with nasty bugs...
ROCK64 was released a year ago and it is better than RPi 4 now.
ROCKPro64 even more better and have PCIExpress slot - unique
and most desirable feature on ARM boards. Also RTC clock
and battery connector for it.
Here is also independend opinion:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0diTHAmVbhc

Apologize in advance for the off-topic.
Also, I have nothing to do with ROCK64 makers,
I just bought one of them while ago and tried to
boot FreeBSD on it without success and it is sad
to see people who can actually fix it to spend
time with objectively worse hardware just due to hype
around it.

Regards,
Denis Polygalov.

On 7/10/19, Robert Crowston via freebsd-arm <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I’m looking at it. The first problem is getting u-boot to work on the
> device.
>
> Andrei Gherzan is also looking at u-boot support; his work is on his github
> account at agherzan. At the moment we’re both stuck trying to enable the MMU
> during board start up. So quite some distance to go yet.
>
> On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 17:12, tech-lists <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Are there any plans on getting freebsd working on the rpi4? Or does it
>> already work? Or partly work?
>>
>> thanks,
>> --
>> J.
> _______________________________________________
> [hidden email] mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
>
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

Karl Denninger
On 7/9/2019 19:52, Denis Polygalov wrote:

> OMG,
> people please please don't be fooled by RPi 3 or 4 or 44...
> It is not in my or anyone's power to decide what FreeBSD arm community work on
> but please let's enhance support of the good OS (FreeBSD)
> on a *good* boards. Let's leave disaster OS to people who want
> to fight with nasty bugs...
> ROCK64 was released a year ago and it is better than RPi 4 now.
> ROCKPro64 even more better and have PCIExpress slot - unique
> and most desirable feature on ARM boards. Also RTC clock
> and battery connector for it.
> Here is also independend opinion:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0diTHAmVbhc
>
> Apologize in advance for the off-topic.
> Also, I have nothing to do with ROCK64 makers,
> I just bought one of them while ago and tried to
> boot FreeBSD on it without success and it is sad
> to see people who can actually fix it to spend
> time with objectively worse hardware just due to hype
> around it.
>
> Regards,
> Denis Polygalov.
Uh, wait -- that one won't boot FreeBSD at present either, right?
--
Karl Denninger
[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
/The Market Ticker/
/[S/MIME encrypted email preferred]/

smime.p7s (6K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

Greg V
In reply to this post by Denis Polygalov
On July 10, 2019 3:52:43 AM GMT+03:00, Denis Polygalov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>ROCK64 was released a year ago and it is better than RPi 4 now.

Definitely not better in terms of processing power. RPi 4 has quad Cortex-A72 cores! A72!!

Also, RPi 4 no longer uses a custom broadcom interrupt controller, it has a GICv2, so it's definitely less stupid than the older ones.

And it's probably the only SoC with an *official* open source GPU driver. Not that the reverse engineered ones are bad, but this is pretty cool. Apparently Mesa V3D is the *only* driver, and no one would ever get a blob.

>ROCKPro64 even more better and have PCIExpress slot - unique
>and most desirable feature on ARM boards.

Unfortunately, it has a craptastic Synopsys Designware PCIe host controller. And from what I understand, the worst version of it – no ECAM mode (probably?), tiny BAR size, no chance of running a GPU. Well, that's what people say on the internet at least.

(For some context, the Marvell MACCHIATObin (Armada 8040) also has a Designware controller, but it actually supports ECAM. It does have a hilarious bug – some devices (in my experience, only ones recognized as "legacy" by edk2) are multiplied, i.e. one device appears in all slots, because the hardware does not filter packets properly. Still, it works, and I have a GPU running on FreeBSD!)

>I just bought one of them while ago and tried to
>boot FreeBSD on it without success

Well, these days it should work – CPU clock control, sdcard and Ethernet at least. I have a patch on phabricator that enables USB3 on the ROCKPro64 (RK3399) – might help ROCK64 too, haven't tested though.
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

Marcin Wojtas
śr., 10 lip 2019 o 03:54 Greg V <[hidden email]> napisał(a):

>
> On July 10, 2019 3:52:43 AM GMT+03:00, Denis Polygalov <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >ROCK64 was released a year ago and it is better than RPi 4 now.
>
> Definitely not better in terms of processing power. RPi 4 has quad Cortex-A72 cores! A72!!
>
> Also, RPi 4 no longer uses a custom broadcom interrupt controller, it has a GICv2, so it's definitely less stupid than the older ones.
>
> And it's probably the only SoC with an *official* open source GPU driver. Not that the reverse engineered ones are bad, but this is pretty cool. Apparently Mesa V3D is the *only* driver, and no one would ever get a blob.
>
> >ROCKPro64 even more better and have PCIExpress slot - unique
> >and most desirable feature on ARM boards.
>
> Unfortunately, it has a craptastic Synopsys Designware PCIe host controller. And from what I understand, the worst version of it – no ECAM mode (probably?), tiny BAR size, no chance of running a GPU. Well, that's what people say on the internet at least.
>
> (For some context, the Marvell MACCHIATObin (Armada 8040) also has a Designware controller, but it actually supports ECAM. It does have a hilarious bug – some devices (in my experience, only ones recognized as "legacy" by edk2) are multiplied, i.e. one device appears in all slots, because the hardware does not filter packets properly. Still, it works, and I have a GPU running on FreeBSD!)

3 cents on Armada8040 PCIE IP. Only endpoints that appear on bdf 0:0:0
are multiplied on all bus0 positions, e.g. e1000 card - this is why
bus0 requires special treatment (in both modes).  Other than that,
when initially configured to ECAM mode it behaves in a fully generic
way.

Regards,
Marcin

>
> >I just bought one of them while ago and tried to
> >boot FreeBSD on it without success
>
> Well, these days it should work – CPU clock control, sdcard and Ethernet at least. I have a patch on phabricator that enables USB3 on the ROCKPro64 (RK3399) – might help ROCK64 too, haven't tested though.
> _______________________________________________
> [hidden email] mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

Mark Linimon-2
In reply to this post by Denis Polygalov
On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 09:52:43AM +0900, Denis Polygalov wrote:
> but please let's enhance support of the good OS (FreeBSD)
> on a *good* boards.

Despite any technical advantages or disadvantages, RPI has the most
mindshare, and we would be foolish to avoid it.

Disclaimer: I'm already grossly overcommitted, but of course if someone
handed me a board, a set of specs, and a large check, anything could
happen :-)

mcl
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

Greg V
In reply to this post by Greg V
On July 10, 2019 5:32:04 AM GMT+03:00, Denis Polygalov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>Dear Greg,
>
>thanks for a lot of useful information.
>I was completely unaware that these boards doesn't look
>as good from inside as from outside.

They're good for what they are. Just keep in mind that they are embedded boards, not workstations, so don't get too excited when you see a PCIe slot.

>Could you please provide your opinion about
>perspectives of NanoPi M4 + FreeBSD combination?

It's a Rockchip RK3399 board, essentially the same as a ROCKPro64. It works, but requires some tinkering (kernel patches to enable more devices).

It's okay if you just want a headless FreeBSD/aarch64 box to compile and test software on. Having two A72 cores is better than only having ultra low power joke cores (A53), but the mixing of the cores (big.LITTLE) is "fun" – FreeBSD's ULE scheduler is not really aware of it, so you can't tell it to, say, "fill up the fast cores first". So you can cpuset your compile job to the fast cores and not benefit from the A53 ones at all, or not cpuset and see the A72s idle sometimes. So an RPi 4 (when supported) would be better – all 4 cores are fast cores!

If you want to use an RK3399 device as a desktop/laptop.. use Linux. You can run FreeBSD in KVM :)

If you specifically want an aarch64 FBSD desktop because you're weird like me… the only "affordable" option right now is the MACCHIATObin, and it's not super fast (funnily enough, same core configuration as an RPi4, only a clock speed and memory advantage) and has a giant network interface that's not supported by FreeBSD. But it runs upstream EDK2 (TianoCore) firmware, with working PCIe under ACPI!

SolidRun are working on a new device (HoneyComb LX2K) that's going to be more powerful (NXP chip with 16 A72 cores, dual channel RAM, overclocking) and with more PCIe lanes (8x slot + M.2 slot)… and another network card FreeBSD does not have a driver for :D Hopefully PCIe under ACPI works, they said they're working on ARM SBSA compliance, but some experts were skeptical about that. I also hope the firmware will be open, but I don't think they promised that yet.
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

tech-lists
In reply to this post by Mark Linimon-2
Hi,

thanks for all your replies. Looking forward to testing it when a
freebsd rpi4 image becomes available.

These will be very popular boards if the other rpi offerings are
anything to go by, so I really hope freebsd will run nicely on
it.
--
J.

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

Johannes Lundberg-2
In reply to this post by Mark Linimon-2

On 7/9/19 8:17 PM, Mark Linimon wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 09:52:43AM +0900, Denis Polygalov wrote:
>> but please let's enhance support of the good OS (FreeBSD)
>> on a *good* boards.
> Despite any technical advantages or disadvantages, RPI has the most
> mindshare, and we would be foolish to avoid it.

Indeed. SBCs come and go. They are EOL before we even have a boot
prompt. Personally I would like to see a joint effort focused on one
board and make that work really well. Maybe an incentive would be the
foundation throwing money at it in the form of rewards for well defined
sub projects. The one most likely to survive longest is RPI but there
might be other valid alternatives as well. Thanks to Emmanuel's efforts
maybe Pine64 is a good alternative? I'm happy to help with graphics if
we would do such focused effort but as long as we're all over the place
I don't see much point in contributing with the limited time I have...

Please note, this is not criticism in any way and I'm not trying to
diminish the work developers do on these boards. Everyone is free to
work on what they want. Question is, do we want a single board computer
that's actually usable for something or only as tinker toys? Without
direction, I'm afraid they will always be half working tinker toys due
to the limited amount of developers we have.

If anyone disagrees, I welcome your point of view.

>
> Disclaimer: I'm already grossly overcommitted, but of course if someone
> handed me a board, a set of specs, and a large check, anything could
> happen :-)
>
> mcl
> _______________________________________________
> [hidden email] mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"

_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

Andreas Schwarz
On 10.07.19, Johannes Lundberg wrote:

> On 7/9/19 8:17 PM, Mark Linimon wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 09:52:43AM +0900, Denis Polygalov wrote:
>>> but please let's enhance support of the good OS (FreeBSD)
>>> on a *good* boards.
>> Despite any technical advantages or disadvantages, RPI has the most
>> mindshare, and we would be foolish to avoid it.
>
> Indeed. SBCs come and go. They are EOL before we even have a boot
> prompt. Personally I would like to see a joint effort focused on one
> board and make that work really well. Maybe an incentive would be the
> foundation throwing money at it in the form of rewards for well defined
> sub projects. The one most likely to survive longest is RPI but there
> might be other valid alternatives as well. Thanks to Emmanuel's efforts
> maybe Pine64 is a good alternative? I'm happy to help with graphics if
> we would do such focused effort but as long as we're all over the place
> I don't see much point in contributing with the limited time I have...

Pine64 and Pine64-LTS are fine, but I've still the problem (for years now)
that reboots via cli are not 100% reliable, in many cases the system stop
booting and I need to press the reset button. I don't know the reason, but
there are many reports related to this issue.

-asc

_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

Jedi Tek'Unum-2
In reply to this post by Johannes Lundberg-2
As a relative noob to SBCs running FreeBSD…

Seems to me that there are well-supported SBCs (although dated) such as Beagle Bone Black.

As a consumer of this stuff, I’d welcome a short list of focused SBCs where I could just pick one of them. Provided that there are at least a couple of categories.

My particular interest is in scaling down to serve in various embedded automation roles. I’m currently using (with Linux as more support for it only very recently appeared for FreeBSD) NanoPi NEO and NanoPi NEO 2. Besides being decent devices they are also classified as LTS. I’m going to be interested in even smaller devices like https://www.crowdsupply.com/groboards/giant-board <https://www.crowdsupply.com/groboards/giant-board>. I’m not hung up on any specific device, and would be more than willing to buy whatever is well supported.

I fully recognize that most people are interested in more powerful devices. So maybe a primary device in each of 2-3 categories would be optimal.

The unfortunate truth is that most of these things come out of the box with Linux support. Another truth is that a lot of the time they are manufacturers minimal attempt. Sometimes things don’t work and rarely do they get updated. So like Linux in general, there are pros and cons. I mention this because I’d rather see a few devices with really good support in FreeBSD rather than many devices with partial/poor support.

Thanks for reading (and thanks to those that are doing all this work to support SBCs with FreeBSD).

_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

Ian Lepore-3
In reply to this post by Johannes Lundberg-2
On Wed, 2019-07-10 at 10:30 -0700, Johannes Lundberg wrote:

> On 7/9/19 8:17 PM, Mark Linimon wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 09:52:43AM +0900, Denis Polygalov wrote:
> > > but please let's enhance support of the good OS (FreeBSD)
> > > on a *good* boards.
> >
> > Despite any technical advantages or disadvantages, RPI has the most
> > mindshare, and we would be foolish to avoid it.
>
> Indeed. SBCs come and go. They are EOL before we even have a boot
> prompt. Personally I would like to see a joint effort focused on one
> board and make that work really well. Maybe an incentive would be the
> foundation throwing money at it in the form of rewards for well defined
> sub projects. The one most likely to survive longest is RPI but there
> might be other valid alternatives as well. Thanks to Emmanuel's efforts
> maybe Pine64 is a good alternative? I'm happy to help with graphics if
> we would do such focused effort but as long as we're all over the place
> I don't see much point in contributing with the limited time I have...
>
> Please note, this is not criticism in any way and I'm not trying to
> diminish the work developers do on these boards. Everyone is free to
> work on what they want. Question is, do we want a single board computer
> that's actually usable for something or only as tinker toys? Without
> direction, I'm afraid they will always be half working tinker toys due
> to the limited amount of developers we have.
>
> If anyone disagrees, I welcome your point of view.
>

What you call a "half working tinker toy" is what we use to build and
ship a dozen different products at $work.  To you, working apparently
means graphics.  To me, I couldn't be less interested in graphics and
it plays no part in a definition of "working".  Developers are going to
work on what they find interesting, or what their employers pay them to
work on.

Trying to assemble a coalition of willing developers to focus on a
single board or family may be a worthy effort.  Trying to make that
some sort of official policy is probably doomed to failure, unless it's
backed with salary-like money (not a few hundred dollars "reward", but
enough money to live on so that it motivates someone to spend more than
hobbyist idle time at it).  Linux doesn't support so many boards
because it has so many more hobbyists at work.  It supports them
because people get paid to write the code.

-- Ian

_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

Søren Schmidt-4
In reply to this post by Jedi Tek'Unum-2
I have had very good experience with the old BananaPi, as one of the few early ARM boards it has native SATA and native 1G ethernet.
It also has a handy Li-ion charger circuit that can function as an UPS and an RTC with battery / supercap backup.
I’ve used many of these as small NAS/backup units that run on less than 5Watts.

However it has taken a lot of hacking and coding the missing pieces, so its not “working out of the box”

That platform is dated, so I’ve started working with the Espressobin V5 instead as a more modern substitute.
Thanks to this list and the excellent work done by other developers, lots of investigation and fiddling and adding code here and there I do have it booting and working good enough to be useful.

Mind you the same applies here, it needs a lot of handholding and knowledge to get working.

All these SBC’s are more or less prototypes, some end up in real products, but mostly its just toys for developers to wet their teeth at.

Just my 0.50 Dkr ;)

-Søren

> On 10 Jul 2019, at 19.58, Jedi Tek'Unum <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> As a relative noob to SBCs running FreeBSD…
>
> Seems to me that there are well-supported SBCs (although dated) such as Beagle Bone Black.
>
> As a consumer of this stuff, I’d welcome a short list of focused SBCs where I could just pick one of them. Provided that there are at least a couple of categories.
>
> My particular interest is in scaling down to serve in various embedded automation roles. I’m currently using (with Linux as more support for it only very recently appeared for FreeBSD) NanoPi NEO and NanoPi NEO 2. Besides being decent devices they are also classified as LTS. I’m going to be interested in even smaller devices like https://www.crowdsupply.com/groboards/giant-board <https://www.crowdsupply.com/groboards/giant-board>. I’m not hung up on any specific device, and would be more than willing to buy whatever is well supported.
>
> I fully recognize that most people are interested in more powerful devices. So maybe a primary device in each of 2-3 categories would be optimal.
>
> The unfortunate truth is that most of these things come out of the box with Linux support. Another truth is that a lot of the time they are manufacturers minimal attempt. Sometimes things don’t work and rarely do they get updated. So like Linux in general, there are pros and cons. I mention this because I’d rather see a few devices with really good support in FreeBSD rather than many devices with partial/poor support.
>
> Thanks for reading (and thanks to those that are doing all this work to support SBCs with FreeBSD).
>
> _______________________________________________
> [hidden email] mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"


signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

Johannes Lundberg-2
In reply to this post by Ian Lepore-3

On 7/10/19 11:10 AM, Ian Lepore wrote:

> On Wed, 2019-07-10 at 10:30 -0700, Johannes Lundberg wrote:
>> On 7/9/19 8:17 PM, Mark Linimon wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 09:52:43AM +0900, Denis Polygalov wrote:
>>>> but please let's enhance support of the good OS (FreeBSD)
>>>> on a *good* boards.
>>> Despite any technical advantages or disadvantages, RPI has the most
>>> mindshare, and we would be foolish to avoid it.
>> Indeed. SBCs come and go. They are EOL before we even have a boot
>> prompt. Personally I would like to see a joint effort focused on one
>> board and make that work really well. Maybe an incentive would be the
>> foundation throwing money at it in the form of rewards for well defined
>> sub projects. The one most likely to survive longest is RPI but there
>> might be other valid alternatives as well. Thanks to Emmanuel's efforts
>> maybe Pine64 is a good alternative? I'm happy to help with graphics if
>> we would do such focused effort but as long as we're all over the place
>> I don't see much point in contributing with the limited time I have...
>>
>> Please note, this is not criticism in any way and I'm not trying to
>> diminish the work developers do on these boards. Everyone is free to
>> work on what they want. Question is, do we want a single board computer
>> that's actually usable for something or only as tinker toys? Without
>> direction, I'm afraid they will always be half working tinker toys due
>> to the limited amount of developers we have.
>>
>> If anyone disagrees, I welcome your point of view.
>>
> What you call a "half working tinker toy" is what we use to build and
> ship a dozen different products at $work.

My apologies if I offended anyone. I didn't know that we had such good
support that you could actually ship products based on it. Maybe I ask
what board that is?


>  To you, working apparently
> means graphics.  

I mean a board, that works out of the box with all features. Something
that could also help to attract new users/consumers to FreeBSD. Students
who work with RPI might choose FreeBSD if there was an OS image with all
features working. We need to lower the barrier for new users and make
FreeBSD more accessible (which is one thing I'm trying to do with my
work to improve FreeBSD on laptops). This is one thing that could help
with that.

> To me, I couldn't be less interested in graphics and
> it plays no part in a definition of "working".  Developers are going to
> work on what they find interesting, or what their employers pay them to
> work on.

Personally I don't care about graphics on SBCs that much either. I don't
use them anymore (I used to, which is why I worked on porting Wayland).
But I'm willing to contribute if it helps the overall well being of the
community and FreeBSD. Besides what I mentioned above, for FreeBSD to be
used in ICE, IVI and other embedded applications with GUI, graphics and
touch input is very much a requirement for "working". No one is ever
going to consider FreeBSD for graphical embedded applications if we
don't even have one board fully supported...

>
> Trying to assemble a coalition of willing developers to focus on a
> single board or family may be a worthy effort.  Trying to make that
> some sort of official policy is probably doomed to failure, unless it's
> backed with salary-like money (not a few hundred dollars "reward", but
> enough money to live on so that it motivates someone to spend more than
> hobbyist idle time at it).  Linux doesn't support so many boards
> because it has so many more hobbyists at work.  It supports them
> because people get paid to write the code.

Maybe you're right and maybe a pointless domed effort unless some big
company pays a bunch of developers to do it. At least, I wanted bounce
this idea around a little.

>
> -- Ian
>
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

Mark Linimon-2
In reply to this post by Jedi Tek'Unum-2
On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 12:58:28PM -0500, Jedi Tek'Unum wrote:
> As a relative noob to SBCs running FreeBSD…
> As a consumer of this stuff, I'd welcome a short list of focused SBCs
> where I could just pick one of them.

We used to have a wiki page listing the popular/"best-supported" arm
boards, but I'm afraid that it is several years out of date, and thus
worse than useless.

If there is anyone on the list who is interested in bringing it back
up to date, let me know.

mcl
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

Stefan Parvu
In reply to this post by Mark Linimon-2

> Despite any technical advantages or disadvantages, RPI has the most
> mindshare, and we would be foolish to avoid it.

Companies and business are building on top of RBPI. The board has a good price/performance
for a number of tasks and recently has started to be adopted even more for industrial usage.
That means paying jobs. We should grow our support by directly using FreeBSD on RBPI boards
on commercial space. We should as well move ARM64 (aarch64) to Tier 1 supported OS, at some
point of time.

At Kronometrix Analytics Finland we have selected FreeBSD as our main OS for ARM and x64
and left Debian. www.kronometrix.com  

Stefan

_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

Mark Linimon-2
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 10:59:09AM +0300, Stefan Parvu wrote:
> We should as well move ARM64 (aarch64) to Tier 1 supported OS, at
> some point of time.

Several people have already been working towards this goal for the
last 3 years; see the following and its associated PRs:

  https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=201763

The progress is also documented in:

  https://wiki.freebsd.org/arm64

mcl
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

tech-lists
In reply to this post by Johannes Lundberg-2
Hi,

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:30:06AM -0700, Johannes Lundberg wrote:

>Please note, this is not criticism in any way and I'm not trying to
>diminish the work developers do on these boards. Everyone is free to
>work on what they want. Question is, do we want a single board computer
>that's actually usable for something or only as tinker toys? Without
>direction, I'm afraid they will always be half working tinker toys due
>to the limited amount of developers we have.
>
>If anyone disagrees, I welcome your point of view.

Thing is, everything is a "tinker toy" in a sense before it becomes a
useful device. I think if future development had to be aimed at a
specific board make, it would make sense to aim at 64-bit
raspberry pi due to its low cost and popularity.

I'm not a developer but an end user. I have at least one of every pi
version with the exception of the pi zero. These pi boards make great
single-purpose computers that use hardly any electrical power.
I have one which is an internet radio, another is a nightcam for the
badgers at the bottom of the garden, another is a split-horizon
name server running unbound. They are *not* toys.

The rpi4 looks like it would be a capable multi-purpose desktop.

I really hope freebsd continues to be runnable on these computers. I
read somewhere (sorry I don't have the link) that the older raspberry pi
versions are still in production as some have found a niche in industral
automation/processes, that kind of thing.
--
J.

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: raspberry pi 4

Ian Lepore-3
In reply to this post by Johannes Lundberg-2
On Wed, 2019-07-10 at 12:19 -0700, Johannes Lundberg wrote:

> On 7/10/19 11:10 AM, Ian Lepore wrote:
> > On Wed, 2019-07-10 at 10:30 -0700, Johannes Lundberg wrote:
> > > On 7/9/19 8:17 PM, Mark Linimon wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 09:52:43AM +0900, Denis Polygalov wrote:
> > > > > but please let's enhance support of the good OS (FreeBSD)
> > > > > on a *good* boards.
> > > >
> > > > Despite any technical advantages or disadvantages, RPI has the most
> > > > mindshare, and we would be foolish to avoid it.
> > >
> > > Indeed. SBCs come and go. They are EOL before we even have a boot
> > > prompt. Personally I would like to see a joint effort focused on one
> > > board and make that work really well. Maybe an incentive would be the
> > > foundation throwing money at it in the form of rewards for well defined
> > > sub projects. The one most likely to survive longest is RPI but there
> > > might be other valid alternatives as well. Thanks to Emmanuel's efforts
> > > maybe Pine64 is a good alternative? I'm happy to help with graphics if
> > > we would do such focused effort but as long as we're all over the place
> > > I don't see much point in contributing with the limited time I have...
> > >
> > > Please note, this is not criticism in any way and I'm not trying to
> > > diminish the work developers do on these boards. Everyone is free to
> > > work on what they want. Question is, do we want a single board computer
> > > that's actually usable for something or only as tinker toys? Without
> > > direction, I'm afraid they will always be half working tinker toys due
> > > to the limited amount of developers we have.
> > >
> > > If anyone disagrees, I welcome your point of view.
> > >
> >
> > What you call a "half working tinker toy" is what we use to build and
> > ship a dozen different products at $work.
>
> My apologies if I offended anyone. I didn't know that we had such good
> support that you could actually ship products based on it. Maybe I ask
> what board that is?
>
>

We use Freescale/Nxp imx6 SOMs from Boundary Devices, SolidRun, and
Technexion (Wandboard's upstream vendor).  Usually we design our own
carrier/motherboards and mount the vendor SOMs on them.  Sometimes
we're able to just directly use the vendor's carrier boards when we
don't need an fpga or other highly customized stuff on the board.  The
products we build are all related in one way or another to precision
timekeeping.

I think I'd sum up the state of freebsd arm32 support like this...

RPi and Beaglebone.  These are "legacy" boards that were the first ones
to run freebsd when we started adding armv6/7 support.  There weren't
that many boards available back then and often the developer/eval board
cost hundreds of dollars, whereas these were cheap and easily
available.  All the current arm32 devs hate working on the crappy old
code for these boards and pretty much only apply fixes, reluctantly, as
needed or requested by users.

imx6.  These are pretty well supported because I get paid to support
them.  Audio and video support is weak because we don't use those at
$work (and I don't have a strong personal interest in those areas).
The most important thing that's missing is pcie support.

Allwinner.  Originally these boards were barely supported, because docs
were hard to get.  Something changed and the docs became available, and
several developers adopted the family out of personal interest, so it's
currently the most-complete and best-supported arm32 family on freebsd.

Marvell.  Supported by the folks at Semihalf, mostly because people pay
them to do so.  The 32-bit marvell world isn't very active these days.

The other arm32 things basically range from "supported, but not much
ongoing activity" to "nobody has touched it for years, hard to call it
supported".

-- Ian


_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
12