16
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
17
Operating Systems and Porting / Re: New Kernel 5.16 and new problem
« on: March 22, 2022, 08:28:36 pm »
Has this failure been reported upstream to the graphics maintainers? If so, can you provide a link to the bug report?
18
Operating Systems and Porting / Re: New Kernel 5.16 and new problem
« on: March 19, 2022, 09:43:25 pm »
The issues should be fixed in the upstream kernel GIT tree:
https://www.spinics.net/lists/amd-gfx/msg74710.html
https://lwn.net/Articles/886568/
Can you confirm the issues are resolved for you on 5.16.2 or higher?
https://www.spinics.net/lists/amd-gfx/msg74710.html
https://lwn.net/Articles/886568/
Can you confirm the issues are resolved for you on 5.16.2 or higher?
19
Talos II / Re: OpenBMC password
« on: March 14, 2022, 01:19:37 pm »
Please ensure you are logging in with the "root" user, either via SSH or the Web interface. Also note that the "1" and "I" characters can look similar on the password paperwork.
20
General OpenPOWER Discussion / Re: The Vikings store (european reseller of RaptorCS products) is open again
« on: March 03, 2022, 11:12:18 am »Could it just be industry size and inertia providing them padding?
We can state for certain this is not the case.
Or if one wants to put a tinfoil hat on, is there a vested interest in seeing through an agenda of destroying user control in all consumer electronics? It would be very interesting to do a deep dive into Intel/AMD connections to certain special groups or funding.
There is indeed a vested interest, the same vested interest that forced the DMCA and (effectively) perpetual copyright through the US legislative process. Whether they are the sole interest or not is in question, but there is no doubt (through public information, no tinfoil required) they are a major driver to this end.
21
General OpenPOWER Discussion / Re: The Vikings store (european reseller of RaptorCS products) is open again
« on: March 03, 2022, 09:41:30 am »
vikings.thum is spot on here.
Something to think about: why is Intel/AMD hardware pricing staying stable, in a high inflation environment...at the same time Pluton and other "final lockdown" strategies are starting to be enforced?
The consumer is going to pay one way or another for inflation, whether it's in the form of increased purchase price or reduced functionality / increased data extraction and sale. Obviously we can only pass cost on through the former means, whereas our signed binary requiring competitors have all options on the table.
If you (and others) want to truly own computing hardware in the future, this is the time to be voting with your wallet. Once owner controlled computing is gone, it will not come back for many generations if at all.
Something to think about: why is Intel/AMD hardware pricing staying stable, in a high inflation environment...at the same time Pluton and other "final lockdown" strategies are starting to be enforced?
The consumer is going to pay one way or another for inflation, whether it's in the form of increased purchase price or reduced functionality / increased data extraction and sale. Obviously we can only pass cost on through the former means, whereas our signed binary requiring competitors have all options on the table.
If you (and others) want to truly own computing hardware in the future, this is the time to be voting with your wallet. Once owner controlled computing is gone, it will not come back for many generations if at all.
22
Firmware / Re: Compiling and Updating BMC
« on: February 09, 2022, 12:15:50 pm »Thank you for your quick response. Your assessment was spot on. After a quick "sudo mount --bind /dev ~/debian-chroot/dev" I was able to compile sort of-ish. Now I get "Summary: There were 2 ERROR messages shown, returning a non-zero exit code."
Did the build process generate the ROM file? If so, the errors can be ignored, if not, then you should delete the build directory and try again as the lack of SHM might have corrupted the build state enough to stop ROM generation.
23
Firmware / Re: Compiling and Updating BMC
« on: February 07, 2022, 02:03:20 pm »Error 38 from Python means you don't have SHM (proc etc.) bind mounted in your chroot.
Correction: /dev is typically where the missing SHM node is located, so you need to bind mount /dev into your chroot.
24
Firmware / Re: Compiling and Updating BMC
« on: February 07, 2022, 01:06:44 pm »Working on a Blackbird/Fedora via debian-chroot, I was able to self compile "blackbird.pnor".
I am stuck with a
"OSError: [Errno 38] Function not implemented
)
ERROR: Unable to connect to bitbake server, or start one"
while Building the OpenBMC firmware.
I had decided to just download the pre-compiled version and became a little confused. The instructions for self compiling say you should end up with 2 files, "image-rofs" and "image-kernel" but when I open the pre-compiled version it contains only one file, "blackbird-v2.00-image-bmc".
EDIT: So, if updating via shell you use the web_ipmi_upgrade and if updating via the web you use the shell_upgrade? I'm sure this makes sense to everybody else but I invert my x-y axis on FPS's.
Error 38 from Python means you don't have SHM (proc etc.) bind mounted in your chroot.
25
Applications and Porting / Re: Chromium and Ungoogled Chromium DNF Repository
« on: November 12, 2021, 12:55:25 pm »I wouldn't spend much effort into Chromium development. First, Google sucks.
That was never in any doubt.
Second, Chromium is just fine, it works. I'm on version 93 or 94. But if you're on 70, 80 or 90 doesn't play a role.
But I'm willing to donate for Firefox improvements. To make it on par or surpass Chromium.
That would be most welcome. We'll kick this around a bit on our side and figure out if / how to make that happen, and whether it makes more sense to e.g. try to directly fund Cameron or if it might make more sense to add some of our resources to his efforts (i.e. determine if he's time or cash limited right now on the Firefox port).
And I assume Mozilla is accepting upstream POWER support?
Yes. Firefox's issues stem purely from performance problems in regard to the lack of JIT etc., and they are willing to accept patches.
I'm pretty sure, in the long run it's better/ easier to support Firefox.
There is a bit of a marketshare (IE6-type) problem here, Chromium is all that many developers write for these days (right or wrong, this is just the way things are) and as a result it is still important to have Chromium support on POWER if it is to remain a viable desktop platform. That said, if Firefox works better and we can really hammer home the privacy aspects (e.g. get Mozilla to start changing some stances on e.g. DRM in the browser) there might be a way back from the brink.
26
Applications and Porting / Re: Chromium and Ungoogled Chromium DNF Repository
« on: November 11, 2021, 09:01:52 pm »
Raptor may be willing to pick this up but since Google has refused to upstream the POWER support, and Chromium is not exactly a "typical" free software product, in the current economy this would have to be under some type of bounty system. Frankly, on our side if we're going to invest in a browser development project we'd probably pick Firefox over Chromium given Google's apparent public stance on owner control / individual data rights.
Our question is: is this something that would be palatable? It's a lot of work, so it'd have to be probably in the several thousand USD range (or, worse, significantly more depending on just how Google managed to break the builds in the interim), but if there are (say) a hundred or more Chromium users here that would come down to $100 or less a person. If it worked, we could even make it a subscription type development service; assuming the user numbers are even close to accurate, something like $50 annually and you all always have an up-to-date Chromium browser with builds for Debian / Fedora.
Thoughts welcome!
Our question is: is this something that would be palatable? It's a lot of work, so it'd have to be probably in the several thousand USD range (or, worse, significantly more depending on just how Google managed to break the builds in the interim), but if there are (say) a hundred or more Chromium users here that would come down to $100 or less a person. If it worked, we could even make it a subscription type development service; assuming the user numbers are even close to accurate, something like $50 annually and you all always have an up-to-date Chromium browser with builds for Debian / Fedora.
Thoughts welcome!
27
Operating Systems and Porting / Re: kernel config: page size 4k vs 64k
« on: February 04, 2021, 10:56:44 pm »Hi, I was not discussing privacy concerns. Actually I'm quite happy with my Blackbird and the community here, which is very supportive of new and less tech savvy users like myself. Also, it performs quite well for my needs from a desktop. I agree with MauryG5 and ClassicHasClass that it's pointless to compare performance.
I appreciate very much the work you guys do at Raptor developing open hardware and wish you continued sucess.
Sincerely
No problem. We're glad to hear you're happy with your Blackbird, and of course are always interested in where we do fall a bit short in real-world performance (and how to improve said shortcomings with software optimizations)!
28
Operating Systems and Porting / Re: kernel config: page size 4k vs 64k
« on: February 04, 2021, 12:32:11 pm »Maybe Power9 is a better fit for HPC or TB HANA in memory DBs but not as a Desktop alternative, not taking into account the difficulty to find software for the architecture.
That's a bit of a stretch, don't you think? Those Intel cores (and similar AMD ones) come with a mandatory signed binary blob on a secondary CPU that has full access to all your data. In the worst case, you could simply be computing faster for an adversary by selecting the Intel solution.
Given the lack of those blobs is one of POWER's main reasons to be used on desktop, a more appropriate comparison for the specific purpose of determining POWER's usability as a desktop computer would be against other silicon that is also blob-free -- older Intel parts (Core Duo timeframe), or blob-free ARM devices (e.g. Rockchip).
If you want the fastest possible desktop with no regard for security, owner control, or privacy, then the simple fact is the latest AMD devices running Windows are your best bet. For many of us, and especially here at Raptor, that represents such a large risk that we'd rather go back to pen and paper...
...much like the Justice Department just did here in the US, actually, after the SolarWinds proprietary / signed malware problems.
29
Talos II / Re: Advice for installing OS via BMC?
« on: February 03, 2021, 03:16:07 am »I'm new to Raptor systems, and I have been granted remote access to a Talos II machine. I need to install the OS, but haven't been successful. So far, I tried the Ubuntu 20.10 PPC64LE and Debian PPC64LE full CD installer over the virtual media, and from the serial connection, I can see the kernel crashes. I have been able to get to the menus in the serial connection for the Debian network installer, but I don't know the network settings. Is it ok to reuse the BMC IP? Is it a safe assumption that the BMC shares the first Ethernet connection port? Next I'm trying Void Linux to see if that's an improvement.
Can you copy / paste the crash messages here so we can take a look? We should be able to resolve the problem rapidly once we know what you're seeing.
Thank you!
30
Firmware / Re: Error Cloning Firmware Git Repo
« on: December 12, 2020, 04:50:10 pm »
Looks like LetsEncrypt updated their intermediate certificates, and the server hosting our GIT repos needed that certificate updated. The intermediate certificate expiry seems to have primarily impacted a handful of command-line tools that require a full certificate chain to be served from the host server.
