PINE64

Full Version: Feature Complete Debian Desktop Release
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Since installing a new filesystem does not work, I ask to include, please, at least the following in the kernel:

  - UDF for DVD
  - HFS + for Apple,



Another way to avoid the problem of filesystems that don't work is to offer a kernel variant WITH "BIG KERNEL LOCK"

Thanks for the attention. And above all, thank you for your much appreciated work.
New major realease is now up. Same image as that which ships with the Pinebook Pro: https://github.com/mrfixit2001/debian_de...tag/190715
please update in installer Smile
(07-20-2019, 03:58 AM)Luke Wrote: [ -> ]New major realease is now up. Same image as that which ships with the Pinebook Pro: https://github.com/mrfixit2001/debian_de...tag/190715
please update in installer Smile

Great news, I'll be checking it out now...
(07-20-2019, 03:58 AM)Luke Wrote: [ -> ]New major realease is now up. Same image as that which ships with the Pinebook Pro: https://github.com/mrfixit2001/debian_de...tag/190715
please update in installer Smile

Great news!
Will DL now.

(...Hope networking [eth] is fixed...)

/Faradn
First of all, thanks! Indeed, this is quite feature-complete release! I had none problems with all packages I needed to build some Qt5 applications. I had a feeling I'm compiling for amd64 architecture, not for arm Smile. None nasty problems with packages! All libraries I needed I was able to install by aptitude or was able to compile from sources with minor efforts.
-=-
About new feature of disabling inactive cores. I noticed that htop is unable to detect disabled cores if they was inactive during htop start. And if all  cores was active at htop start it shows all six. But the bars of CPU core load are displaying incorrectly. The cores in shut down are displaying the same load value as last active core.  Like this: [attachment=1388].
Currently I need to watch CPU cores loading to become familiar with some software behavior. I will be interested with better power saving finally. But now I'd prefer to disable CPU cores shutdown. Is there a possibility to disable inactive core shutdown then enable it back when needed?

Thank you!
(08-04-2019, 04:26 PM)Nikolay_Po Wrote: [ -> ]-=The cores in shut down are displaying the same load value as last active core.  Like this: .
Currently I need to watch CPU cores loading to become familiar with some software behavior. I will be interested with better power saving finally. But now I'd prefer to disable CPU cores shutdown. Is there a possibility to disable inactive core shutdown then enable it back when needed?

Not sure if this helps: 
Found a statement in July update for pinebook pro:
Quote:Lastly, I think its worth noting that you can also turn individual cores on and off manually from the userspace for cores cpu0-5 (exchange value for X), which comes in handy if all you’re doing is terminal work or taking notes in class: echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/online. This applies to all current Linux builds. 
This does not work, as HIMA does not care about offline/online flag. The only way is disabling hima completely (I think it was `/sys/kernel/hima_hotplug/hima-active`).

As for the results: when I was testing it, if this is something that would be useful to include in my images I noticed that this does not reduce power consumption,
or the change is very small.
**********************

I thought I remembered Luke saying in a YouTube video that the Pine book Pro operating system was able to automatically control how many cores and at the speed as it needed ?
When used with the default/shipping operating system..

************************
(10-08-2019, 03:02 PM)bcnaz Wrote: [ -> ]**********************

  I thought I remembered  Luke  saying in a YouTube  video that the Pine book Pro  operating system was able to automatically control how many cores and at the speed as it needed  ?
  When used with the default/shipping operating system..

                                   ************************

Yes, this was rolled back because, as pointed out, it didn't preserve that much power but did have a negative impact on performance.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16