Does anyone achieved 32 bit userspace image for 64 bit board(and kernel)

[Salvador Liébana]

Hi, I am trying to get an armhf mainline image for rk3399 and another one for other amlogic socs (s9xx) to test panfrost and lima properly. Many propietary binaries/libs are armhf, also many dynarec are armhf only alongside box86 emulator. Ive tried several attempts with no success to boot. Chroots have been useful for now.. but aren't that friendly, also, multiarch its not that great on arm, mesa 32 and 64 goes in conflict all the time.

 

 

ive read an old post about this topic. Essentially it said you need to create an image for a 32 bit board and replace the uboot and kernel, also, set the proper dtb.. ive tried several times, also edited other stuff on /etc to set the arm64 kernel.. but it doesnt boot.

[lanefu]

Ive had decent luck with armhf docker containers on 64bit in the past. Might want to look into that

[Crossplatform Vlad]

On 3/3/2020 at 1:23 AM, lanefu said:

Ive had decent luck with armhf docker containers on 64bit in the past. Might want to look into that

 

Do you mean

apt install docker-ce:armhf

 

or something else?

 

Related, but most wanted question - Can we start two docker servers with two archs? for example:
unix:///var/run/docker-armv7l.sock - socket for dockerd instance with arm arch

unix:///var/run/docker-arm64.sock - socket for another dockerd instance with arm64 arch

 

[PSL]

It is possible but ARMBIAN doesn't support this :-( (status of 2020-09)

Ubuntu on Odroid C2 or ARM instances runing Ubuntu in Amazon AWS cloud support that. This is the trick:

sudo dpkg --add-architecture armhf
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install libc6:armhf libstdc++6:armhf

Problem is that Armbian doesn't support armhf architecture (no packages in the repository).

 

Well that is just one part of the problem. Other part is that ARM CPU has to support "armhf" instructions. Most of these low end CPUs used on SBCs support "armhf" but there are ARM chips for datacentres those support only "aach64".

 

I am not sure but I think that kernel should should have support for "armhf" too.

 

This topic is often discussed in Boinc community because most Boinc projects supports only "armhf" and have no tasks  for "aarch64". It is interesting, it is 2020 and there are many arm64 computers in the world, arm64 code delivers better performance than "armhf" but Boinc projects ignore "arm64". Maybe it is because Raspbian for RPI was 32-bit OS and most SBCs in the World are RPI computers. On the other side, most devices running Android are 32-bit too.

 

From my point of view, it is an issue that Armbian doesn't support "armhf" architecture.

 

Edited September 21, 2020 by PSL

[Werner]

3 hours ago, PSL said:

Problem is that Armbian doesn't support armhf architecture

if that would be true please explain how Armbian could run on SBCs like the Orange Pi One which features H3 SoC which is 32bit and therefore armhf

[Igor]

8 hours ago, PSL said:

From my point of view, it is an issue that Armbian doesn't support "armhf" architecture.

Its about having 32bit user land on 64bit board. Which is useful in some corner cases. We didn't get there to cover that even there were some initiatives years ago: https://github.com/armbian/build/issues/645

 

RPi is different in this since its by design a proprietary video player where its possible to run Linux. Which is why there were many complications how to boot its proprietary OS in 32bit while ARM cores in 64bit ...

Armbian provides 64bit Linux since first 64bit board support. I think that was in 2016 with Odroid C2 followed by Allwinner A64 boards.

 

8 hours ago, PSL said:

Problem is that Armbian doesn't support armhf architecture (no packages in the repository).

Please check your claims next time.
https://docs.armbian.com/#what-is-armbian

 

8 hours ago, PSL said:

arm64 code delivers better performance

That is also just a myth.

[lanefu]

if you really need 32bit apps... often youcan use 32bit armhf containers on arm64 if all the libraries are there.

[Werner]

Moved to p2p since this seems more a help request rathen than a feature request