Hi,
On 8/16/21 12:55 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Kevin Fenzi:
On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 01:51:16PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Kevin Fenzi:
Yes. They were mistakenly running the normal kernel (so they had ~3GB
memory available). I moved them back to the lpae kernel (so they see
40GB memory), but this causes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1920183
basically OOM kills kojid, which restarts kojid, which restarts the
build, which kills kojid, etc...
Why aren't the builders running 64-bit kernels, like we do for x86-64?
This is not a configuration that I think we support in any way.
Who is “we”?
I expect that 64-bit kernel bugs will get more attention upstream.
At least rpm rejects trying to install a aarch64 kernel on a 32bit
userspace.
The host (including kojid) should probably be 64-bit, and only the
chroot 32-bit. If that doesn't work, it's an RPM bug/missing feature.
OS wise, 32-bit containers/etc work fine on 64-bit fedora kernels. This
also solves the problem that server grade HW with 32-bit guest (EL1+)
support is becoming rarer (basically only older A72 based platforms now)
and would provide a path forward on more recent Gravaton2, Ampere, etc
platforms.
That said, there as you mention various rpm/package build/etc problems
caused by `uname -m` returning armv8.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
