unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

graysky · 2011-11-10 21:29:21

dare- downsides like what could go wrong with adding that provides array? I understand how it works and what it does, I just haven't thought about a situation where that could screw something up... is there one anyone can think of? If it's something value-added I am all for it.

poltak · 2011-11-12 00:50:23

Hi, are you planning to include the newly released patch for the famous 2.6.38+ ASPM power regression bug, or leave it up to individuals until it gets accepted into the mainline release? I've just noticed that you've included other patches in your aur package, and this one would be a much appreciated one, especially for laptop users.

graysky · 2011-11-12 01:57:19

@poltak - this is the first I've heard of it and am unqualified to make a call as to its implications to stability, etc.. Judging by the response in the LKML, they're taking a wait-and-see approach to it. You wanna open a flyspray request to see how the Arch dev's feel about including it?

bangkok_manouel · 2011-11-12 01:59:01

also, it doesn't apply cleanly on -stable

Evanlec · 2011-11-12 03:37:27

graysky wrote:

dare- downsides like what could go wrong with adding that provides array? I understand how it works and what it does, I just haven't thought about a situation where that could screw something up... is there one anyone can think of? If it's something value-added I am all for it.

I can't see any downsides. The provides array makes a lot more sense to me anyway...linux-ck-kx should provide linux-ck , same with linux-headers-ck-kx should provide linux-headers-ck

Evanlec · 2011-11-12 03:58:41

Also...your repo seems to be down...if you want I could provide a failover mirror? using a dns failover method so it was transparent to users..

graysky · 2011-11-12 10:40:04

@Evanlec - thanks for the feedback. Are you sure it's down? Works for me...

$ sudo pacman -Syy
:: Synchronizing package databases...
 core                                      97.7K  500.1K/s 00:00:00 [#####################################] 100%
 extra                                   1093.1K 1849.2K/s 00:00:01 [#####################################] 100%
 multilib                                  56.8K  388.5K/s 00:00:00 [#####################################] 100%
 community                                811.9K 1630.7K/s 00:00:00 [#####################################] 100%
 repo-ck                                    8.5K   90.2K/s 00:00:00 [#####################################] 100%

big_bum · 2011-11-12 10:44:38

Now it's working.

LE: Not working again...

:: Retrieving packages from repo-ck...
error: failed retrieving file 'linux-ck-corex-3.1-6-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz' from repo-ck.com : Not Found
error: failed retrieving file 'linux-ck-corex-headers-3.1-6-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz' from repo-ck.com : Not Found
warning: failed to retrieve some files from repo-ck
error: failed to commit transaction (Not Found)
Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded.

Last edited by big_bum (2011-11-12 10:45:23)

graysky · 2011-11-12 10:55:41

@big_bum - thank you for that... a mistake with rsync removed the linux-ck-*.xz packages from x86_64 is my best guess. I am re-uploading them now; check back in 15 min or so. Also, building 3.1.1-1 for the repo now. They should be online in 2 h or so.

big_bum · 2011-11-12 10:59:16

No problem, but you shouldn't tell me that you're building 3.1.1.
Now I'll wait for the 3.1.1 kernel instead of updating to 3.1-6.

graysky · 2011-11-12 12:41:38

3.1.1-1 packages are online now.

big_bum · 2011-11-12 12:55:44

Updated && working like a charm.

twilight0 · 2011-11-13 01:07:56

@graysky what cflags do you use now in linux-ck-kx package?

graysky · 2011-11-13 01:38:48

@twilight - The external CFLAGS have no effect on kernels, what counts is the settings used in the .config file which I change for each specific package; see post #593 for details.

EDIT: I edited this to make more sense for someone just finding this thread on a search.

Last edited by graysky (2011-11-13 11:11:23)

MrCode · 2011-11-13 02:30:30

I am convinced that CFLAGS have no effect on kernels

So, wait…why do we have ck-corex, kx, p4, etc. then?

I'm probably just misunderstanding this, but I thought the point of those packages was that they were built with mtune/march options appropriate to that particular microarch…

twilight0 · 2011-11-13 03:44:39

@graysky Not the generic packages, the AMD ones please.

bangkok_manouel · 2011-11-13 05:18:35

these are his makepkg.conf CFLAGS which indeed are ignored when building a kernel. however, you can setup the cpu type in your kernel config, which will be passed to gcc. hence the different packages.

/edit: see this file, starting at line 52 and also this file to see the what .config settings do.

Last edited by bangkok_manouel (2011-11-13 05:30:31)

graysky · 2011-11-13 11:12:27

MrCode wrote:

I am convinced that CFLAGS have no effect on kernels
So, wait…why do we have ck-corex, kx, p4, etc. then?
I'm probably just misunderstanding this, but I thought the point of those packages was that they were built with mtune/march options appropriate to that particular microarch…

twilight0 wrote:

@graysky Not the generic packages, the AMD ones please.

Quick answer:
I build each package because all the tuning we usually do in /etc/makepkg.conf happens based on the options in the .config that is generated for each specific CPU. This is a special case that applies to the kernel packages... these settings reflect the "Processor Family" setting in the .config file used to compile. As bangkok_m pointed out, if you read the makefile for the kernel packages, the processor family settings set up cflags as well as other CPU-specific optimization which I do for each package. These settings effectively redefine the cflags values specified in /etc/makepkg.conf or ~/.makepkg.conf.

More details:
To see for yourself, download the AUR PKGBUILD and enable the "_makenconfig" option. Start the build and when you get into the nconfig tool, navigate to: Processor type and features>Processor family

Here is a screenshot of what the x86_64 selection there looks like; this would be for the corex packages:

bangkok_manouel wrote:

these are his makepkg.conf CFLAGS which indeed are ignored when building a kernel. however, you can setup the cpu type in your kernel config, which will be passed to gcc. hence the different packages.

As bangkok_manouel pointed out, external cflags are redefined within the Makefile itself and are thereby ignored. See the following two files for what this setting correspond to behind-the-scenes.

arch/x86/Makefile
arch/x86/Makefile_32.cpu

Excerpt from $srcdir/linux-$pkgver/arch/x86/Makefile:

# FIXME - should be integrated in Makefile.cpu (Makefile_32.cpu)
cflags-$(CONFIG_MK8) += $(call cc-option,-march=k8)
cflags-$(CONFIG_MPSC) += $(call cc-option,-march=nocona)

cflags-$(CONFIG_MCORE2) += \
$(call cc-option,-march=core2,$(call cc-option,-mtune=generic))
cflags-$(CONFIG_MATOM) += $(call cc-option,-march=atom) \
$(call cc-option,-mtune=atom,$(call cc-option,-mtune=generic))
cflags-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_CPU) += $(call cc-option,-mtune=generic)
...

Last edited by graysky (2011-11-13 11:56:52)

poltak · 2011-11-13 11:39:51

graysky wrote:

Quick answer:
I build each package because all the tuning we usually do in /etc/makepkg.conf happens based on the options in the .config that is generated for each specific CPU. This is a special case that applies to the kernel packages... these settings reflect the "Processor Family" setting in the .config file used to compile. As bangkok_m pointed out, if you read the makefile for the kernel packages, the processor family settings set up cflags as well as other CPU-specific optimization which I do for each package. These settings effectively redefine the cflags values specified in /etc/makepkg.conf or ~/.makepkg.conf.

Sorry, but just going back to what twilight0 asked (or rephrasing it), what Processor Family options do you use for the linux-ck-kx (AMD) package?
I just ask as in the wiki it states that it's optimised for K10 family processors (Phenom II etc.), but I've been under the assumption for a while that the "Opteron/Athlon64/Hammer/K8" option in Processor Family in .config does not specifically build the kernel optimised for K10 family processors... are my assumptions just outdated, or do you do some other magic to this package that makes it nice for AMD processors (including the K10 family)?

graysky · 2011-11-13 11:55:02

poltak wrote:

Sorry, but just going back to what twilight0 asked (or rephrasing it), what Processor Family options do you use for the linux-ck-kx (AMD) package?
I just ask as in the wiki it states that it's optimised for K10 family processors (Phenom II etc.), but I've been under the assumption for a while that the "Opteron/Athlon64/Hammer/K8" option in Processor Family in .config does not specifically build the kernel optimised for K10 family processors... are my assumptions just outdated, or do you do some other magic to this package that makes it nice for AMD processors (including the K10 family)?

As of 3.1.1, the kernel devs do not have an implicate k10 option. To answer your question, I use "Opteron/Athlon64/Hammer/K8" which accoring to src/linux-3.1/arch/x86/Makefile:

cflags-$(CONFIG_MK8) += $(call cc-option,-march=k8)

Perhaps someone needs to make a suggestion to LKML to add additional options?

bangkok_manouel · 2011-11-13 12:02:42

A quick and dirty sed line should do the job if gcc supports this flag

graysky · 2011-11-13 12:22:34

@bangkok - that thought crossed my mind but are there more options in other files? I'm no kernel hacker

bangkok_manouel · 2011-11-13 12:40:07

greping the source tells me that should be enough, i'll try

bangkok_manouel · 2011-11-13 13:00:42

@graysky, that should work, see Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.txt

MrCode · 2011-11-13 21:12:07

graysky wrote:

Quick answer:
I build each package because all the tuning we usually do in /etc/makepkg.conf happens based on the options in the .config that is generated for each specific CPU. This is a special case that applies to the kernel packages... these settings reflect the "Processor Family" setting in the .config file used to compile. As bangkok_m pointed out, if you read the makefile for the kernel packages, the processor family settings set up cflags as well as other CPU-specific optimization which I do for each package. These settings effectively redefine the cflags values specified in /etc/makepkg.conf or ~/.makepkg.conf.

Thanks for the clarification.

Arch Linux

#576 2011-11-10 21:29:21

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#577 2011-11-12 00:50:23

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#578 2011-11-12 01:57:19

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#579 2011-11-12 01:59:01

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#580 2011-11-12 03:37:27

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#581 2011-11-12 03:58:41

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#582 2011-11-12 10:40:04

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#583 2011-11-12 10:44:38

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#584 2011-11-12 10:55:41

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#585 2011-11-12 10:59:16

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#586 2011-11-12 12:41:38

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#587 2011-11-12 12:55:44

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#588 2011-11-13 01:07:56

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#589 2011-11-13 01:38:48

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#590 2011-11-13 02:30:30

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#591 2011-11-13 03:44:39

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#592 2011-11-13 05:18:35

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#593 2011-11-13 11:12:27

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#594 2011-11-13 11:39:51

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#595 2011-11-13 11:55:02

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#596 2011-11-13 12:02:42

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#597 2011-11-13 12:22:34

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#598 2011-11-13 12:40:07

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#599 2011-11-13 13:00:42

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#600 2011-11-13 21:12:07

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

Board footer