On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 9:00 PM Donatom M donatom.martino@gmail.com wrote:
How do I do that. I thought it would be automatic.
Reply All.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 12:20 PM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
Please leave the mailing list on replied.
I would agree that fedora 34 arm has some disadvantages when run on Raspberry Pi 4 with xorg server. I have fedora installed onto a SSD drive. As another member mentioned, I have found that audio does not work out of the box. I have not tried to get audio to work because audio was not important to me on this build. I would hope that Raspberry Pi support and fedora-arm would work on remedying the few problems that exist.
I would like to note that I also have Archlinux-Arm with X server on an SD card (128 GiG) and everything works without any problem at all, so I would think that if Arch-ARM can build a system that is fully functional on Raspberry Pi 4, so can Fedora-ARM. All of my systems are running 64 bit with Raspberry Pi 4, by the way.
Archlinux-Arm uses the downstream Raspberry Pi fork of the kernel.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 1:32 AM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
> On this page it states that the RPi4 is not supported.
That is correct, there's a very large cavernous gap between "may work for a number of purposes including yours" and something that will work for the vast majority of users.
The core "supported" status will change when the standard GUI runs fully accelerated and users have WiFi/sound and the things that are associated with a reasonable desktop experience as that's the default means a lot of new users expect. That's what I, as the RPi maintainer, did when we introduced "supported" RPi3. Any less than that the support queries are too high.
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/Raspberry_Pi#Raspberry_Pi_4
yes the statement about hardware support isn't quite correct anymore. But there is still a noticeable difference between the mainline kernel (which Fedora uses) and the vendor kernel from the Raspberry Pi Foundation.
Most notably are:
- audio support
- V3D support
Those two are critical.
An update to say clearly that only server/headless worked then would better the. The blanket “it does not work”. I is only that I looked deeper that I found out that it might work.
The Wiki page explicitly does not say "it does not work" it says it's not supported. The words are chosen specifically. By saying it's supported a user can rock up when something doesn't work and ask for support or assistance, if something breaks we block the release etc. By saying it's not supported a user may try it and if it works for them great, but if it breaks while we'll attempt to fix it that may take time and it may not get fixed.
Oh and would need a warning that the boot is very slow. I see a black screen for a couple of minutes before I see any output from the kernel or systemd.
Oh look, a user asking for "support".... see my points above!
A lot users doesn't accept this. Instead of blaming the vendor to focus on its own kernel branch, they blame Fedora for using the mainline kernel. So that's the reason to say it's not officially supported.
It's one reason, but not the only ones.
> There a lots of messages in this mailing archieve showing that people are > getting Fedora to work on RPi4.
Yes, and that's the idea, a more advanced user will be able to ascertain it works, and it has for a *long* time and likely be able to do most of what they want to do.
> Is there still a reason to claim its not supported? > If so what should I be watching out for/avoiding with the RPi4? For a headless / server setup there shouldn't be no general issues.
For a headless server it should be fine, but a general user comes via Fedora Workstation and expect and accelerated desktop and sound and we don't have them working ATM.
Peter
- The Fedora Raspberry Pi "maintainer"
arm mailing list -- arm@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to arm-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/arm@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Okay. Thanks, Peter.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 1:07 PM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 9:00 PM Donatom M donatom.martino@gmail.com wrote:
How do I do that. I thought it would be automatic.
Reply All.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 12:20 PM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com
wrote:
Please leave the mailing list on replied.
I would agree that fedora 34 arm has some disadvantages when run on
Raspberry Pi 4 with xorg server. I have fedora installed onto a SSD drive. As another member mentioned, I have found that audio does not work out of the box. I have not tried to get audio to work because audio was not important to me on this build. I would hope that Raspberry Pi support and fedora-arm would work on remedying the few problems that exist.
I would like to note that I also have Archlinux-Arm with X server on
an SD card (128 GiG) and everything works without any problem at all, so I would think that if Arch-ARM can build a system that is fully functional on Raspberry Pi 4, so can Fedora-ARM. All of my systems are running 64 bit with Raspberry Pi 4, by the way.
Archlinux-Arm uses the downstream Raspberry Pi fork of the kernel.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 1:32 AM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com
wrote:
>> On this page it states that the RPi4 is not supported.
That is correct, there's a very large cavernous gap between "may work for a number of purposes including yours" and something that will
work
for the vast majority of users.
The core "supported" status will change when the standard GUI runs fully accelerated and users have WiFi/sound and the things that are associated with a reasonable desktop experience as that's the default means a lot of new users expect. That's what I, as the RPi
maintainer,
did when we introduced "supported" RPi3. Any less than that the support queries are too high.
>>
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/Raspberry_Pi#Raspberry_Pi_4
> > yes the statement about hardware support isn't quite correct
anymore.
> But there is still a noticeable difference between the mainline
kernel
> (which Fedora uses) and the vendor kernel from the Raspberry Pi
Foundation.
> > Most notably are: > - audio support > - V3D support
Those two are critical.
An update to say clearly that only server/headless worked then
would better the. The blanket “it does not work”. I is only that I looked deeper that I found out that it
might work.
The Wiki page explicitly does not say "it does not work" it says it's not supported. The words are chosen specifically. By saying it's supported a user can rock up when something doesn't work and ask for support or assistance, if something breaks we block the release etc. By saying it's not supported a user may try it and if it works for them great, but if it breaks while we'll attempt to fix it that may take time and it may not get fixed.
Oh and would need a warning that the boot is very slow. I see a black screen for a couple of minutes before I see any
output
from the kernel or systemd.
Oh look, a user asking for "support".... see my points above!
> A lot users doesn't accept this. Instead of blaming the vendor
to focus
> on its own kernel branch, they blame Fedora for using the
mainline
> kernel. So that's the reason to say it's not officially
supported.
It's one reason, but not the only ones.
>> There a lots of messages in this mailing archieve showing that
people are
>> getting Fedora to work on RPi4.
Yes, and that's the idea, a more advanced user will be able to ascertain it works, and it has for a *long* time and likely be able
to
do most of what they want to do.
>> Is there still a reason to claim its not supported? >> If so what should I be watching out for/avoiding with the RPi4? > For a headless / server setup there shouldn't be no general
issues.
For a headless server it should be fine, but a general user comes via Fedora Workstation and expect and accelerated desktop and sound and
we
don't have them working ATM.
Peter
- The Fedora Raspberry Pi "maintainer"
arm mailing list -- arm@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to arm-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
Someone on this thread mentioned that Archlinux-ARM uses raspberry pi linux kernel. That might be for the 32 bit version but when you are running 64 bit on the raspberry pi it seems that the kernel is a regular linux kernel for ARM architecture. [url] https://kiljan.org/2021/05/28/64-bit-arch-linux-arm-on-a-raspberry-pi-4-mode... [/url]
I bring this up because I believe Fedora ARM could use the same kernel (non-raspberry pi modified) and thereby get all features (audio, etc.) working out of the box.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 3:52 PM Donatom M donatom.martino@gmail.com wrote:
Okay. Thanks, Peter.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 1:07 PM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 9:00 PM Donatom M donatom.martino@gmail.com wrote:
How do I do that. I thought it would be automatic.
Reply All.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 12:20 PM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com
wrote:
Please leave the mailing list on replied.
I would agree that fedora 34 arm has some disadvantages when run on
Raspberry Pi 4 with xorg server. I have fedora installed onto a SSD drive. As another member mentioned, I have found that audio does not work out of the box. I have not tried to get audio to work because audio was not important to me on this build. I would hope that Raspberry Pi support and fedora-arm would work on remedying the few problems that exist.
I would like to note that I also have Archlinux-Arm with X server on
an SD card (128 GiG) and everything works without any problem at all, so I would think that if Arch-ARM can build a system that is fully functional on Raspberry Pi 4, so can Fedora-ARM. All of my systems are running 64 bit with Raspberry Pi 4, by the way.
Archlinux-Arm uses the downstream Raspberry Pi fork of the kernel.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 1:32 AM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com
wrote:
> >> On this page it states that the RPi4 is not supported.
That is correct, there's a very large cavernous gap between "may
work
for a number of purposes including yours" and something that will
work
for the vast majority of users.
The core "supported" status will change when the standard GUI runs fully accelerated and users have WiFi/sound and the things that are associated with a reasonable desktop experience as that's the
default
means a lot of new users expect. That's what I, as the RPi
maintainer,
did when we introduced "supported" RPi3. Any less than that the support queries are too high.
> >>
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/Raspberry_Pi#Raspberry_Pi_4
> > > > yes the statement about hardware support isn't quite correct
anymore.
> > But there is still a noticeable difference between the mainline
kernel
> > (which Fedora uses) and the vendor kernel from the Raspberry Pi
Foundation.
> > > > Most notably are: > > - audio support > > - V3D support
Those two are critical.
> An update to say clearly that only server/headless worked then
would better the. The blanket “it does not work”. I is only that I looked deeper that I found out that it
> might work.
The Wiki page explicitly does not say "it does not work" it says
it's
not supported. The words are chosen specifically. By saying it's supported a user can rock up when something doesn't work and ask for support or assistance, if something breaks we block the release etc. By saying it's not supported a user may try it and if it works for them great, but if it breaks while we'll attempt to fix it that may take time and it may not get fixed.
> Oh and would need a warning that the boot is very slow. > I see a black screen for a couple of minutes before I see any
output
> from the kernel or systemd.
Oh look, a user asking for "support".... see my points above!
> > A lot users doesn't accept this. Instead of blaming the vendor
to focus
> > on its own kernel branch, they blame Fedora for using the
mainline
> > kernel. So that's the reason to say it's not officially
supported.
It's one reason, but not the only ones.
> >> There a lots of messages in this mailing archieve showing that
people are
> >> getting Fedora to work on RPi4.
Yes, and that's the idea, a more advanced user will be able to ascertain it works, and it has for a *long* time and likely be able
to
do most of what they want to do.
> >> Is there still a reason to claim its not supported? > >> If so what should I be watching out for/avoiding with the RPi4? > > For a headless / server setup there shouldn't be no general
issues.
For a headless server it should be fine, but a general user comes
via
Fedora Workstation and expect and accelerated desktop and sound and
we
don't have them working ATM.
Peter
- The Fedora Raspberry Pi "maintainer"
arm mailing list -- arm@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to arm-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 5:14 PM Donatom M donatom.martino@gmail.com wrote:
Someone on this thread mentioned that Archlinux-ARM uses raspberry pi linux kernel. That might be for the 32 bit version but when you are running 64 bit on the raspberry pi it seems that the kernel is a regular linux kernel for ARM architecture. [url] https://kiljan.org/2021/05/28/64-bit-arch-linux-arm-on-a-raspberry-pi-4-mode... [/url]
I bring this up because I believe Fedora ARM could use the same kernel (non-raspberry pi modified) and thereby get all features (audio, etc.) working out of the box.
As the maintainer I've already investigated that, if it's "working" it's not an upstream kernel as not all things are upstream. One of the upstream maintainers commented explicitly on that earlier in the thread. It's not like I don't actually read just about all of the upstream kernel commits for each cycle to see what changes.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 3:52 PM Donatom M donatom.martino@gmail.com wrote:
Okay. Thanks, Peter.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 1:07 PM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 9:00 PM Donatom M donatom.martino@gmail.com wrote:
How do I do that. I thought it would be automatic.
Reply All.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 12:20 PM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
Please leave the mailing list on replied.
I would agree that fedora 34 arm has some disadvantages when run on Raspberry Pi 4 with xorg server. I have fedora installed onto a SSD drive. As another member mentioned, I have found that audio does not work out of the box. I have not tried to get audio to work because audio was not important to me on this build. I would hope that Raspberry Pi support and fedora-arm would work on remedying the few problems that exist.
I would like to note that I also have Archlinux-Arm with X server on an SD card (128 GiG) and everything works without any problem at all, so I would think that if Arch-ARM can build a system that is fully functional on Raspberry Pi 4, so can Fedora-ARM. All of my systems are running 64 bit with Raspberry Pi 4, by the way.
Archlinux-Arm uses the downstream Raspberry Pi fork of the kernel.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 1:32 AM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote: > > > >> On this page it states that the RPi4 is not supported. > > That is correct, there's a very large cavernous gap between "may work > for a number of purposes including yours" and something that will work > for the vast majority of users. > > The core "supported" status will change when the standard GUI runs > fully accelerated and users have WiFi/sound and the things that are > associated with a reasonable desktop experience as that's the default > means a lot of new users expect. That's what I, as the RPi maintainer, > did when we introduced "supported" RPi3. Any less than that the > support queries are too high. > > > >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/Raspberry_Pi#Raspberry_Pi_4 > > > > > > yes the statement about hardware support isn't quite correct anymore. > > > But there is still a noticeable difference between the mainline kernel > > > (which Fedora uses) and the vendor kernel from the Raspberry Pi Foundation. > > > > > > Most notably are: > > > - audio support > > > - V3D support > > Those two are critical. > > > An update to say clearly that only server/headless worked then would better the. The blanket “it does not work”. I is only that I looked deeper that I found out that it > > might work. > > The Wiki page explicitly does not say "it does not work" it says it's > not supported. The words are chosen specifically. By saying it's > supported a user can rock up when something doesn't work and ask for > support or assistance, if something breaks we block the release etc. > By saying it's not supported a user may try it and if it works for > them great, but if it breaks while we'll attempt to fix it that may > take time and it may not get fixed. > > > Oh and would need a warning that the boot is very slow. > > I see a black screen for a couple of minutes before I see any output > > from the kernel or systemd. > > Oh look, a user asking for "support".... see my points above! > > > > A lot users doesn't accept this. Instead of blaming the vendor to focus > > > on its own kernel branch, they blame Fedora for using the mainline > > > kernel. So that's the reason to say it's not officially supported. > > It's one reason, but not the only ones. > > > >> There a lots of messages in this mailing archieve showing that people are > > >> getting Fedora to work on RPi4. > > Yes, and that's the idea, a more advanced user will be able to > ascertain it works, and it has for a *long* time and likely be able to > do most of what they want to do. > > > >> Is there still a reason to claim its not supported? > > >> If so what should I be watching out for/avoiding with the RPi4? > > > For a headless / server setup there shouldn't be no general issues. > > For a headless server it should be fine, but a general user comes via > Fedora Workstation and expect and accelerated desktop and sound and we > don't have them working ATM. > > Peter > - The Fedora Raspberry Pi "maintainer" > _______________________________________________ > arm mailing list -- arm@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to arm-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/arm@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
I just restarted my fedora-arm system on raspberry pi 4 after days of using another system and found that the sound does in fact work (I shut off all devices but my bluetooth speaker in the pavucontrol configuration window -- misconfiguration in pavucontrol likely was the reason I could not get audio to work before).
So I would say that the mainline fedora-ARM aarch64 kernel is functioning pretty well on my system: video works well as does audio, all usb ports work (usb 2 and 3) and I am able to start up on an SSD with no problem. Wifi and bluetooth have been functional out of the box.
The system does take about two minute to boot up. I am using openbox with full xorg capability.
It seems that there is a good case for stating that raspberry pi 4B is supported by the fedora-ARM 64 bit kernel (aarch64) on the Fedora-ARM wiki. Now perhaps things don't work as well on a Fedora Workstation which is very bloated -- I don't know but I do know that on a less demanding system (like openbox), everything seems to be running well.
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 9:21 AM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 5:14 PM Donatom M donatom.martino@gmail.com wrote:
Someone on this thread mentioned that Archlinux-ARM uses raspberry pi
linux kernel. That might be for the 32 bit version but when you are running 64 bit on the raspberry pi it seems that the kernel is a regular linux kernel for ARM architecture. [url] https://kiljan.org/2021/05/28/64-bit-arch-linux-arm-on-a-raspberry-pi-4-mode... [/url]
I bring this up because I believe Fedora ARM could use the same kernel
(non-raspberry pi modified) and thereby get all features (audio, etc.) working out of the box.
As the maintainer I've already investigated that, if it's "working" it's not an upstream kernel as not all things are upstream. One of the upstream maintainers commented explicitly on that earlier in the thread. It's not like I don't actually read just about all of the upstream kernel commits for each cycle to see what changes.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 3:52 PM Donatom M donatom.martino@gmail.com
wrote:
Okay. Thanks, Peter.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 1:07 PM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 9:00 PM Donatom M donatom.martino@gmail.com
wrote:
How do I do that. I thought it would be automatic.
Reply All.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 12:20 PM Peter Robinson <
pbrobinson@gmail.com> wrote:
Please leave the mailing list on replied.
> I would agree that fedora 34 arm has some disadvantages when run
on Raspberry Pi 4 with xorg server. I have fedora installed onto a SSD drive. As another member mentioned, I have found that audio does not work out of the box. I have not tried to get audio to work because audio was not important to me on this build. I would hope that Raspberry Pi support and fedora-arm would work on remedying the few problems that exist.
> > I would like to note that I also have Archlinux-Arm with X server
on an SD card (128 GiG) and everything works without any problem at all, so I would think that if Arch-ARM can build a system that is fully functional on Raspberry Pi 4, so can Fedora-ARM. All of my systems are running 64 bit with Raspberry Pi 4, by the way.
Archlinux-Arm uses the downstream Raspberry Pi fork of the kernel.
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 1:32 AM Peter Robinson <
pbrobinson@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > >> On this page it states that the RPi4 is not supported. >> >> That is correct, there's a very large cavernous gap between "may
work
>> for a number of purposes including yours" and something that
will work
>> for the vast majority of users. >> >> The core "supported" status will change when the standard GUI
runs
>> fully accelerated and users have WiFi/sound and the things that
are
>> associated with a reasonable desktop experience as that's the
default
>> means a lot of new users expect. That's what I, as the RPi
maintainer,
>> did when we introduced "supported" RPi3. Any less than that the >> support queries are too high. >> >> > >>
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/Raspberry_Pi#Raspberry_Pi_4
>> > > >> > > yes the statement about hardware support isn't quite correct
anymore.
>> > > But there is still a noticeable difference between the
mainline kernel
>> > > (which Fedora uses) and the vendor kernel from the Raspberry
Pi Foundation.
>> > > >> > > Most notably are: >> > > - audio support >> > > - V3D support >> >> Those two are critical. >> >> > An update to say clearly that only server/headless worked then
would better the. The blanket “it does not work”. I is only that I looked deeper that I found out that it
>> > might work. >> >> The Wiki page explicitly does not say "it does not work" it says
it's
>> not supported. The words are chosen specifically. By saying it's >> supported a user can rock up when something doesn't work and ask
for
>> support or assistance, if something breaks we block the release
etc.
>> By saying it's not supported a user may try it and if it works
for
>> them great, but if it breaks while we'll attempt to fix it that
may
>> take time and it may not get fixed. >> >> > Oh and would need a warning that the boot is very slow. >> > I see a black screen for a couple of minutes before I see any
output
>> > from the kernel or systemd. >> >> Oh look, a user asking for "support".... see my points above! >> >> > > A lot users doesn't accept this. Instead of blaming the
vendor to focus
>> > > on its own kernel branch, they blame Fedora for using the
mainline
>> > > kernel. So that's the reason to say it's not officially
supported.
>> >> It's one reason, but not the only ones. >> >> > >> There a lots of messages in this mailing archieve showing
that people are
>> > >> getting Fedora to work on RPi4. >> >> Yes, and that's the idea, a more advanced user will be able to >> ascertain it works, and it has for a *long* time and likely be
able to
>> do most of what they want to do. >> >> > >> Is there still a reason to claim its not supported? >> > >> If so what should I be watching out for/avoiding with the
RPi4?
>> > > For a headless / server setup there shouldn't be no general
issues.
>> >> For a headless server it should be fine, but a general user
comes via
>> Fedora Workstation and expect and accelerated desktop and sound
and we
>> don't have them working ATM. >> >> Peter >> - The Fedora Raspberry Pi "maintainer" >> _______________________________________________ >> arm mailing list -- arm@lists.fedoraproject.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to
arm-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
>> List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>> List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 7:47 PM Donatom M donatom.martino@gmail.com wrote:
I just restarted my fedora-arm system on raspberry pi 4 after days of using another system and found that the sound does in fact work (I shut off all devices but my bluetooth speaker in the pavucontrol configuration window -- misconfiguration in pavucontrol likely was the reason I could not get audio to work before).
So I would say that the mainline fedora-ARM aarch64 kernel is functioning pretty well on my system: video works well as does audio, all usb ports work (usb 2 and 3) and I am able to start up on an SSD with no problem. Wifi and bluetooth have been functional out of the box.
The system does take about two minute to boot up. I am using openbox with full xorg capability.
It seems that there is a good case for stating that raspberry pi 4B is supported by the fedora-ARM 64 bit kernel (aarch64) on the Fedora-ARM wiki. Now perhaps things don't work as well on a Fedora Workstation which is very bloated -- I don't know but I do know that on a less demanding system (like openbox), everything seems to be running well.
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 9:21 AM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 5:14 PM Donatom M donatom.martino@gmail.com wrote:
Someone on this thread mentioned that Archlinux-ARM uses raspberry pi
linux kernel. That might be for the 32 bit version but when you are running 64 bit on the raspberry pi it seems that the kernel is a regular linux kernel for ARM architecture. [url] https://kiljan.org/2021/05/28/64-bit-arch-linux-arm-on-a-raspberry-pi-4-mode... [/url]
I bring this up because I believe Fedora ARM could use the same kernel
(non-raspberry pi modified) and thereby get all features (audio, etc.) working out of the box.
As the maintainer I've already investigated that, if it's "working" it's not an upstream kernel as not all things are upstream. One of the upstream maintainers commented explicitly on that earlier in the thread. It's not like I don't actually read just about all of the upstream kernel commits for each cycle to see what changes.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 3:52 PM Donatom M donatom.martino@gmail.com
wrote:
Okay. Thanks, Peter.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 1:07 PM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 9:00 PM Donatom M donatom.martino@gmail.com
wrote:
How do I do that. I thought it would be automatic.
Reply All.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 12:20 PM Peter Robinson <
pbrobinson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Please leave the mailing list on replied. > > > I would agree that fedora 34 arm has some disadvantages when run
on Raspberry Pi 4 with xorg server. I have fedora installed onto a SSD drive. As another member mentioned, I have found that audio does not work out of the box. I have not tried to get audio to work because audio was not important to me on this build. I would hope that Raspberry Pi support and fedora-arm would work on remedying the few problems that exist.
> > > > I would like to note that I also have Archlinux-Arm with X
server on an SD card (128 GiG) and everything works without any problem at all, so I would think that if Arch-ARM can build a system that is fully functional on Raspberry Pi 4, so can Fedora-ARM. All of my systems are running 64 bit with Raspberry Pi 4, by the way.
> > Archlinux-Arm uses the downstream Raspberry Pi fork of the kernel. > > > On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 1:32 AM Peter Robinson <
pbrobinson@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> > >> On this page it states that the RPi4 is not supported. > >> > >> That is correct, there's a very large cavernous gap between
"may work
> >> for a number of purposes including yours" and something that
will work
> >> for the vast majority of users. > >> > >> The core "supported" status will change when the standard GUI
runs
> >> fully accelerated and users have WiFi/sound and the things that
are
> >> associated with a reasonable desktop experience as that's the
default
> >> means a lot of new users expect. That's what I, as the RPi
maintainer,
> >> did when we introduced "supported" RPi3. Any less than that the > >> support queries are too high. > >> > >> > >>
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/Raspberry_Pi#Raspberry_Pi_4
> >> > > > >> > > yes the statement about hardware support isn't quite
correct anymore.
> >> > > But there is still a noticeable difference between the
mainline kernel
> >> > > (which Fedora uses) and the vendor kernel from the
Raspberry Pi Foundation.
> >> > > > >> > > Most notably are: > >> > > - audio support > >> > > - V3D support > >> > >> Those two are critical. > >> > >> > An update to say clearly that only server/headless worked
then would better the. The blanket “it does not work”. I is only that I looked deeper that I found out that it
> >> > might work. > >> > >> The Wiki page explicitly does not say "it does not work" it
says it's
> >> not supported. The words are chosen specifically. By saying it's > >> supported a user can rock up when something doesn't work and
ask for
> >> support or assistance, if something breaks we block the release
etc.
> >> By saying it's not supported a user may try it and if it works
for
> >> them great, but if it breaks while we'll attempt to fix it that
may
> >> take time and it may not get fixed. > >> > >> > Oh and would need a warning that the boot is very slow. > >> > I see a black screen for a couple of minutes before I see any
output
> >> > from the kernel or systemd. > >> > >> Oh look, a user asking for "support".... see my points above! > >> > >> > > A lot users doesn't accept this. Instead of blaming the
vendor to focus
> >> > > on its own kernel branch, they blame Fedora for using the
mainline
> >> > > kernel. So that's the reason to say it's not officially
supported.
> >> > >> It's one reason, but not the only ones. > >> > >> > >> There a lots of messages in this mailing archieve showing
that people are
> >> > >> getting Fedora to work on RPi4. > >> > >> Yes, and that's the idea, a more advanced user will be able to > >> ascertain it works, and it has for a *long* time and likely be
able to
> >> do most of what they want to do. > >> > >> > >> Is there still a reason to claim its not supported? > >> > >> If so what should I be watching out for/avoiding with the
RPi4?
> >> > > For a headless / server setup there shouldn't be no general
issues.
> >> > >> For a headless server it should be fine, but a general user
comes via
> >> Fedora Workstation and expect and accelerated desktop and sound
and we
> >> don't have them working ATM. > >> > >> Peter > >> - The Fedora Raspberry Pi "maintainer" > >> _______________________________________________ > >> arm mailing list -- arm@lists.fedoraproject.org > >> To unsubscribe send an email to
arm-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
> >> Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> >> List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> >> List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
> >> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
I just restarted my fedora-arm system on raspberry pi 4 after days of using another system and found that the sound does in fact work (I shut off all devices but my bluetooth speaker in the pavucontrol configuration window -- misconfiguration in pavucontrol likely was the reason I could not get audio to work before).
So I would say that the mainline fedora-ARM aarch64 kernel is functioning pretty well on my system: video works well as does audio, all usb ports work (usb 2 and 3) and I am able to start up on an SSD with no problem. Wifi and bluetooth have been functional out of the box.
Well bluetooth is an interesting choice as it definitely has issues because there's not an upstream firmware so it sort of works but has a lot of issues. If it works for you great
The system does take about two minute to boot up. I am using openbox with full xorg capability.
Well I'm not sure what you mean by "full xorg capability" in this context as it will be non accelerated which is probably OK for something as basic as openbox but for the desktops that the other 99.9% use such as GNOME/KDE/XFCE it's really not a great experience.
It seems that there is a good case for stating that raspberry pi 4B is supported by the fedora-ARM 64 bit kernel (aarch64) on the Fedora-ARM wiki. Now perhaps things don't work as well on a Fedora Workstation which is very bloated -- I don't know but I do know that on a less demanding system (like openbox), everything seems to be running well.
I completely disagree, you don't provide a strong case at all, it's not even on a mainstream desktop environment, it's one that's probably 0.1% of the Fedora RPi user community.
For starters there's no accelerated graphics upstream, as stated a number of times before. The person who was working on that stopped because the device would lock up randomly due to power state transitions and the details of that isn't public so needs someone from the RPi foundation to provide the right information. I think that request is outstanding 6+ months now.
We have a regression upstream with booting systems headless[1] probably one of the biggest RPi usecases in Fedora.
And we've even has issues with booting them in the lead up to F-35 Beta and while we now have a work around the RPi foundation team can't even agree whether their firmware works or regresses [2].
And that just 3 examples of why I, as the maintainer of the Raspberry Pi in Fedora, don't think it's not in a state where we can state support for the Raspberry Pi 4 in Fedora. Frankly with some of the recent regressions and the lack of interest from RPi to actually support general purpose distributions I am strongly reconsidering the support status of all generations of the Raspberry Pi.
I've been the maintainer of the RPi since we started supporting it in Fedora 25, and was involved in the entire process right from the outset and having hate actual hate mail and actual physical threats over this device I am well aware of what state we need the device to be in before I make that change in the wiki or anywhere else.
If you wish to take over the maintainer-ship I will gladly step aside!
Peter
[1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg922125.html [2] https://github.com/raspberrypi/firmware/issues/1619#issuecomment-925982112
Am 24.09.21 um 04:47 schrieb Donatom M:
I just restarted my fedora-arm system on raspberry pi 4 after days of using another system and found that the sound does in fact work (I shut off all devices but my bluetooth speaker in the pavucontrol configuration window -- misconfiguration in pavucontrol likely was the reason I could not get audio to work before).
So I would say that the mainline fedora-ARM aarch64 kernel is functioning pretty well on my system: video works well as does audio, all usb ports work (usb 2 and 3) and I am able to start up on an SSD with no problem. Wifi and bluetooth have been functional out of the box.
I was imprecise in my mail about audio support. HDMI audio (provided by vc4) should work, the audio jack (provided by bcm2835-audio) should not.
Regards
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 7:23 PM Stefan Wahren stefan.wahren@i2se.com wrote:
Am 24.09.21 um 04:47 schrieb Donatom M:
I just restarted my fedora-arm system on raspberry pi 4 after days of using another system and found that the sound does in fact work (I shut off all devices but my bluetooth speaker in the pavucontrol configuration window -- misconfiguration in pavucontrol likely was the reason I could not get audio to work before).
So I would say that the mainline fedora-ARM aarch64 kernel is functioning pretty well on my system: video works well as does audio, all usb ports work (usb 2 and 3) and I am able to start up on an SSD with no problem. Wifi and bluetooth have been functional out of the box.
I was imprecise in my mail about audio support. HDMI audio (provided by vc4) should work, the audio jack (provided by bcm2835-audio) should not.
That's mostly my experience, that HDMI audio works most of the time, but we've had a bunch of random regressions upstream, it seems to come and go hence why my general point is that it's not supported, ultimately in fact now I see that as generally the case for vc4 as a whole it used to be very stable but now it's stability in general seems to vary greatly.
Peter
-
Donatom M -
Peter Robinson -
Stefan Wahren