unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

Fackamato · 2019-10-24 17:35:06

I tried searching the forums but didn't find anything useful (I wish it was possible to search within threads only).

Is the linux-ck series recommended for an Archlinux Virtualbox guest under Windows 10? Secondary, not really related I suppose, what is the recommended hypervisor for an Arch guest under Win10, is it KVM?

Thanks

Tharbad · 2019-10-24 17:45:55

Fackamato wrote:

I tried searching the forums but didn't find anything useful (I wish it was possible to search within threads only).
Is the linux-ck series recommended for an Archlinux Virtualbox guest under Windows 10? Secondary, not really related I suppose, what is the recommended hypervisor for an Arch guest under Win10, is it KVM?
Thanks

Recommended for what? The second question is Hyper V. You should ask that in the newbie corner.

Fackamato · 2019-10-24 17:57:10

Tharbad wrote:

Fackamato wrote:
I tried searching the forums but didn't find anything useful (I wish it was possible to search within threads only).
Is the linux-ck series recommended for an Archlinux Virtualbox guest under Windows 10? Secondary, not really related I suppose, what is the recommended hypervisor for an Arch guest under Win10, is it KVM?
Thanks
Recommended for what? The second question is Hyper V. You should ask that in the newbie corner.

Of course, I forgot to mention that. Recommended for desktop responsiveness / user interaction.

kronikpillow · 2019-10-25 12:52:52

@graysky i read some article (can't find it anymore, that it is better to install linux-ck trough the AUR package over the binary package provided by repo-ck as it will build from source, and will build for "my hardware" .... is this true? are there any advantages of installing trough the AUR package and selecting ivybridge in it's menu selection over installing the binary linux-ck-ivybridge package?

also I would like to note that the linux-ck-headers package in the AUR git url is pointing to the linux-ck git url ... and doesn't allow me to git clone the headers package :-/

Tharbad · 2019-10-25 13:49:41

kronikpillow wrote:

@graysky i read some article (can't find it anymore, that it is better to install linux-ck trough the AUR package over the binary package provided by repo-ck as it will build from source, and will build for "my hardware" .... is this true? are there any advantages of installing trough the AUR package and selecting ivybridge in it's menu selection over installing the binary linux-ck-ivybridge package?
also I would like to note that the linux-ck-headers package in the AUR git url is pointing to the linux-ck git url ... and doesn't allow me to git clone the headers package :-/

Building from source is always better from the performance pov. See Gentoo. However, it can take time, especially for big projects.

V1del · 2019-10-25 14:03:59

kronikpillow wrote:

@graysky i read some article (can't find it anymore, that it is better to install linux-ck trough the AUR package over the binary package provided by repo-ck as it will build from source, and will build for "my hardware" .... is this true? are there any advantages of installing trough the AUR package and selecting ivybridge in it's menu selection over installing the binary linux-ck-ivybridge package?
also I would like to note that the linux-ck-headers package in the AUR git url is pointing to the linux-ck git url ... and doesn't allow me to git clone the headers package :-/

In the case you are outlining, no there is unlikely to be a discernible difference, the entire point of the -cpuarchitecture packages is that they've been built with target CPU optimisations in mind. If you only manual adjustment in the build chain is changing to march=native you are basically doing the same thing and are unlikely to see any noticable benefit.

(Even then it can be up for debate on whether automated built in march optimisations really add all that much to performance of the end result as opposed to custom tailored code which will be executed even on generic builds...)

Last edited by V1del (2019-10-25 14:05:43)

jooch · 2019-10-25 14:54:29

I see the piledriver version isn't available right now, is this still in the works?

graysky · 2019-10-25 16:47:52

Tharbad wrote:

kronikpillow wrote:
@graysky i read some article (can't find it anymore, that it is better to install linux-ck trough the AUR package over the binary package provided by repo-ck as it will build from source, and will build for "my hardware" .... is this true? are there any advantages of installing trough the AUR package and selecting ivybridge in it's menu selection over installing the binary linux-ck-ivybridge package?
also I would like to note that the linux-ck-headers package in the AUR git url is pointing to the linux-ck git url ... and doesn't allow me to git clone the headers package :-/
Building from source is always better from the performance pov. See Gentoo. However, it can take time, especially for big projects.

I agree with V1del. I build each of these subarchs (ivybridge, sandybridge, zen, etc.) in a clean-chroot which selects the corresponding options in my gcc patch. If you build these yourself, you would do so via the same patch. In short, linux-ck-ivybridge from [repo-ck] will be the same as if you built linux-ck from the PKGBUILD and selected the ivybridge option.

@jooch - I am updating for 5.3.7-ck now. Piledriver should be available.

Last edited by graysky (2019-10-25 16:51:15)

glitsj16 · 2019-10-26 01:28:40

@graysky Looks like CK merged the fix for systemd-detect-virt. I think you can drop this now in the PKGBUILD.

graysky · 2019-10-26 10:36:33

@glitsj16 - Great, will incorporate for 5.3.8-ck1.

Kvbev · 2019-10-27 00:51:22

hey graysky,

the repo-ck.db file in the repository appears out of date and is still listing 5.2.21 kernels. pacman wont show the new 5.3 kernel for me.

I did the steps below to confirm this.

mkdir test
cd  test
wget repo-ck.com/x86_64/repo-ck.db
tar -xf repo-ck.db
ls

can you confirm or is this some caching issue for me?

Last edited by Kvbev (2019-10-27 00:53:32)

archimboldo · 2019-10-27 06:58:42

Kvbev wrote:

pacman wont show the new 5.3 kernel for me.

There is 5.3 version in AUR. https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/linux-ck/

graysky · 2019-10-27 10:11:21

@Kvbev and @archimboldo - thanks for letting me know. Please try now.

archimboldo · 2019-10-27 10:17:38

It's on. Thank you!

Novac · 2019-10-27 10:48:42

Hi, I just updated to linux-ck-skylake 5.3.7 and now my DKMS modules (nvidia-dkms and virtualbox-host-dkms) fail to build: https://pastebin.com/sFQXSZCn
My install is up to date otherwise and the modules are building fine on the regular linux kernel. After searching I found some results which suggested to rebuild the kernel, I'll try that now.

Edit: Building the kernel fixes this issue indeed, I used the linux-ck AUR package and enabled the native optimizations (skylake in my case).

Last edited by Novac (2019-10-27 11:06:20)

graysky · 2019-10-27 11:42:59

@Novac - I believe this is due the differences in gcc versions. In this case, that is causing your issue due (currently) different versions of the toolchain in [testing] now including nvidia-dkms. I understood the best practice for kernel compilation was to build with [testing] enabled. I will seek feedback and adjust my SOP for 5.3.8.

cirrus · 2019-10-28 13:05:45

graysky wrote:

@Novac - I believe this is due the differences in gcc versions.

Can confirm updating to gcc-9.2.0-3 rectifies matters.

Regards

Reganomicon · 2019-10-30 19:46:47

Hello guys,

If this is the wrong place to request this then I apologise and would thoroughly appreciate being directed to the right place to do so, but I was wondering if the fsync patches were able to be implemented into the linux-ck kernels at all?

Thank you in advance, hope you're all having a good morning/day/evening

graysky · 2019-10-30 19:51:55

Which patches? linux-ck follows the official linux package + gcc optimize patch + ck1.

Reganomicon · 2019-10-30 20:25:40

So I commented on one of Colin Kolivas' blog posts about adding the fsync patches to his -ck patchset, and it was generally accepted that CK was (understandably) not willing to add someone else's patches into his patchset, as he would have no control of them or their development.

It was suggested that I instead contact the maintainer of the distro-specific kernel distributions themselves to see about them adding the fsync patches to them, as that would be the most logical and effective way of getting valves fsync patches added to the kernels.

So for the maintainers of the repock repo, I was requesting that the fsync patches be added to the linux-ck kernels, along with their optimised version they have also.

I apologise for not explaining myself better, kinda jumped straight into it without any backstory to my request.

Thank you for replying!

graysky · 2019-10-30 21:16:54

With the exception of BFQ (now mainlined), I have always followed this and am reluctant to deviate particularly for repo-ck provided packages:

graysky wrote:

linux-ck follows the official linux package + gcc optimize patch + ck1.

You are welcome to modify the PKGBUILD to include whatever you want.

hotty · 2019-11-03 12:30:57

I'm not sure if this is the right place but since I installed the latest version of linux-ck-haswell the mkinitcpio preset for linux-ck is missing resulting in no modules loaded at start.

graysky · 2019-11-03 12:34:24

@hotty - is your system up-to-date? What version of mkinitcpio and kmod do you have?

hotty · 2019-11-03 12:41:49

According to yay, I'm up to date.

# mkinitcpio --version
mkinitcpio 26

#kmod --version
kmod version 26
+XZ +ZLIB +LIBCRYPTO -EXPERIMENTAL

Edit: Seems like the pacman mirror I'm using is not in sync. I'm trying a different mirror and update my system.

Last edited by hotty (2019-11-03 12:45:06)

hotty · 2019-11-03 12:48:25

Yep, it was an out of sync mirror.

# mkinitcpio --version
mkinitcpio 27

Everything works now. I'm sorry to take up your time for basically nothing.

Arch Linux

#3551 2019-10-24 17:35:06

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

#3552 2019-10-24 17:45:55

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

#3553 2019-10-24 17:57:10

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

#3554 2019-10-25 12:52:52

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

#3555 2019-10-25 13:49:41

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

#3556 2019-10-25 14:03:59

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

#3557 2019-10-25 14:54:29

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

#3558 2019-10-25 16:47:52

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

#3559 2019-10-26 01:28:40

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

#3560 2019-10-26 10:36:33

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

#3561 2019-10-27 00:51:22

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

#3562 2019-10-27 06:58:42

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

#3563 2019-10-27 10:11:21

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

#3564 2019-10-27 10:17:38

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

#3565 2019-10-27 10:48:42

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

#3566 2019-10-27 11:42:59

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

#3567 2019-10-28 13:05:45

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

#3568 2019-10-30 19:46:47

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

#3569 2019-10-30 19:51:55

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

#3570 2019-10-30 20:25:40

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

#3571 2019-10-30 21:16:54

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

#3572 2019-11-03 12:30:57

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

#3573 2019-11-03 12:34:24

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

#3574 2019-11-03 12:41:49

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

#3575 2019-11-03 12:48:25

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

Board footer