Installing 64-bit OS on ARMv8 Hardware with 'armeabi-v7a' ABI - Need Guidance

[Novus]

I have a unique hardware setup with an ARMv8 architecture but a 32-bit 'armeabi-v7a' ABI. My goal is to install a 64-bit operating Ambian (or others, even a 64 bit Android Go if possible) system on this hardware, replacing the existing 32-bit setup. The device is a kids tablet ZIDS701 by Trayoo. The current OS is Android Go 10 32-bit. I'm kind of a newbie to firmware, so I'm reaching out to the knowledgeable members of this community for guidance and assistance in achieving this. I'm particularly interested in recommendations for a 64-bit OS that would be compatible with this setup and any steps or considerations I should be aware of during the installation process.

Much appreciated thank you.

[Bugger]

Consider that installation again, is it worth to do that change at all — if your computer has 4 GB (or less) your existing 32-bit system will be less resource hungry, since its „words” are 4-byte long, not 8-byte.

I've got as my other computer Orange Pi 800 — and I'm considering exactly the opposite: replacement of its 64-bit „factory installed” OS with 32-bit variant (for the reason above).

[Novus]

Good point, I hadn't considered the resource requirements. It only has 2Gb RAM so it makes sense to keep it at 32bit. I just hopped to increase it's compatibility with 64 bit applications (and also just felt like replacing the OS ad I'm not sure the one on it is clean or watching me) Thanks for the reply and tip.

Edited September 20, 2023 by Novus

[Bugger]

You know: actually 64-bit can be attractive only if you need to use more than 4 GB of memory. If you have less than 4 GB (which isn't the case), it may still sound attractive if you're going to do calculations on incredibly large numbers (say: you want to calculate distances between the stars directly in kilometers/miles, instead of in „light years” ;). 64-bit OS doesn't offer any speed gains only for the sake of its „higher bitness”.

In every other „use case” 32-bit system is better, being less resource-hungry. If you mean applications — well, in the Linux world they usually are available equally as 32-bit or 64-bit packages. In the worst case you'll still be able to compile them on your own.

P.S. And „last, but not least” — ARM32 assembly language is so much nicer than the variant for AArch64… they crippled it because of „lack of command space” in 64-bit variant.

Edited September 20, 2023 by Bugger
I forgot…

[Igor]

23 hours ago, Bugger said:

and I'm considering exactly the opposite: replacement of its 64-bit „factory installed” OS with 32-bit variant

You forgot one thing. Those OS variants are not comparable in many critical components. Factory OS that are provided by HW vendor is often presentation grade. Good enough for YT presenters to promote their HW while is otherwise forgotten and virtually unmaintained.  We are the only one that are maintaing this. Other distros do this very little or not at all.

Armbian does not provide 32bit userland (for 64b hw) as it adds complexity (for maintainers which are the most critical resource for you) and saves very little. In case you want a real deal, dedicate few weeks / months and bring up this feature withing build system. If enough people will be happy to justify this. Low memory 64bit system are dying out ...

[Bugger]

I'm aware it's not just about „bitness”; if it was that simple it already would be done. That's why I'm examining this possibility — but not going to „brick” my new Orange.

[ag123]

for ARM based SOCs, a problem is that there is no 'generic' kernel that can support the specific in chip and on board hardware components e.g. the HDMI graphics drivers, all the various components wifi, ethernet, even on chip interfaces such as usb, memory flash, mmc support and even power management, powering on and off and all that are *distinct* and most of that *undocumented* across ARM SOCs, this is true be they 32 bits or 64 bits. which practically means that searching for an 'OS' that is 'compatible' is going to either simply draw a blank or that you are going to get an 'OS' in which many parts are broken, e.g. no HDMI, no graphics drivers, no usb, no wifi, no ethernet, no nothing etc. you simply have to research the challenges supporting all the different boards here.

 

bitness is a different challenge, for one, using 64 bits vs 32 bits may mean gigabytes of gigabytes / billions of all the apps, shared libraries, kernel, drivers etc would need to be recompiled into 64 or 32 bit binaries. effectively needing 2 universes of binaries to support the whole suite of apps 

 

Edited September 21, 2023 by ag123

[Novus]

Ok. It sounds like I'm in over my head. I haven't used Linux for a long time, many years, I am beginning to remember when I used to try to install it on my PC before it was made simple, I had to mess with modprobe and configure many things manually. Now that I think of it, I'm not even sure how the boot loading works on Android tablets, it's not like I can just flash any Linux system like with a PC right?

 

You've all been very helpful. I think I'll give up here before going down the rabbit hole.

[Igor]

19 minutes ago, Novus said:

Now that I think of it, I'm not even sure how the boot loading works on Android tablets, it's not like I can just flash any Linux system like with a PC right?

Every SoC family (can) boot different. Dealing with custom designed hardware, which we are dealing here, is incomparable more complex then Linux in standard PC world. And its not just booting that is different.