On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 7:49 AM Peter Boy <pboy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:> > I very much appreciate the work to support the various SBC devices like Raspberry Pi and workalikes. But I'm a little lost with this proposal. > > > Am 05.07.2022 um 23:16 schrieb Ben Cotton <bcotton@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > The work around Raspberry Pi 4 has been on going for a number of > > years, but we've never officially supported it due to lack of > > accelerated graphics and other key features. A few of us have led the > > push to get the accelerated graphics work over the line upstream so it > > now makes sense to enable this in Fedora and make support for the > > Raspberry Pi 4 more official. > > Why Raspberry Pi, and that as the only model from the large number of comparable devices? Because basically the RPi is a 10 times ratio over pretty much all the other devices we support. > Why not other devices, whose makers - as far as I understood the discussion - are far more OSS friendly or e.g. explicitly name Fedora as a recommended operating system? See point above, but we DO support dozens of those devices you mention already. > I know, Raspberry Pi is very popular. But this looks to me a bit like Fedora, the proverbial uninvited guest shouting "me too" from his corner. Not at all, for years we've not officially supported, even though some features have long worked, it as things like accelerated graphics didn't work, this is exactly like what we need back in around Fedora 26 for the RPi3, see the Fedora magazine article from the time. > > This work will polish the support for the Raspberry Pi 4 and include > > some wider general improvements to the Raspberry Pis that we > > officially support which include the RPi3 series and the Zero2W. > > Again, why Raspberry Pi, and not e.g. Pine64 Rock64Pro or Radxa Rock Pi, just to name 2 capable devices? We already fully support the RockPro64, and it's sibling the Pinebook Pro, plus a lot of other rk3399 based devices. They are all pretty awesome. I did a whole bunch of the upstream support for a bunch of those devices. > And what is the long tern plan? Do we want to evolve a list of supported hardware? Maybe Lenovo next for x86-64 arch? We already support a lot of Lenovo HW, we've blocked releases when some of their HW support is broken. > > There are some minor caveats here: > > > > * Support for WiFi on the Raspberry Pi 400 is out of scope as it's > > dependent on the engagement (in this case the lack of) the vendor, > > Synaptics, of the WiFi module shipped on this device providing generic > > upstream firmware. > > > > * The Raspberry Pi CM4 is an a module designed for IoT, Edge and > > Embedded use cases. We will test and support the CM4 on the official > > IO board, it should work on other devices that incorporate the CM4 > > assuming the vendor has their support in the upstream Raspberry Pi > > firmware/overlays. > > > > * Further device support around audio and other such pieces will be > > reviewed as part of the process. > > I think these statements are true in the same way for a great many other boards. Of course, we can't work on everything, but again, why Raspberry of all things? It's basically more popular that pretty much all of the other boards combined. Also this is as much about the marketing to let people know that tried to make the RPi4 work and went away because accelerated graphics didn't work. > > > > > == Benefit to Fedora == > > > > The Raspberry Pi 4 is a widely available, reasonably prices device. It > > Apart from the fact that it has been almost twice as expensive as comparable boards for quite some time. > > > has worked well in Fedora for some time in IoT and Server use cases, > > and now with a fully accelerated graphics stack available it's a great > > device from a price-per-performance perspective, and it has a wide > > ecosystem, so fully supporting this in Fedora makes a compelling case. > > Instead of focusing on one commercial manufacturer, I would like to see a - possibly short - list of boards that we recommend for workstation alike and for server alike variants, decided on the basis of edition's requirements. And for which we take concrete measures to improve support in Fedora. (And I would really like to see the arm group more visible and present in the Fedora universe). > > > > == Scope == > > * Proposal owners: > > ** Ensure any patches required are accepted upstream > > ** Work with kernel, mesa and other maintainers to ensure everything > > is as it should be > > ** Test > > I don't understand what exactly is supposed to change. Don’t you do that already? (and in a very good and effective way) > > And when we start to support a device or device category in this prominent way, then it also needs a lot more documentation and visibility, e.g., a dedicated section on the Fedora docs landing page. > > > > == How To Test == > > > > * Buy a Raspberry Pi 4 (if you can) > ^^ really nice > > > > > > -- > Peter Boy > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy > pboy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST (UTC+2) > > Fedora Server Edition Working Group member > Fedora docs team contributor > Java developer and enthusiast > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 _______________________________________________ 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
