Integrate ARM Runners #160
Draft
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This is the standard output file for all encoders, so why not:)
+ Use the arm_machines as specified in arm_machines + Introduce functions to return aarch64 works and not aarch64 works (RDWork) + Guard various checks
|
Do not merge yet, We would need another logic to avoid using arm runners for all other workers. |
|
Revive based on #119 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
These runners were commissioned many years back with frontend exposing arch64 as an option, but we never had a backend integration for them.
The runner is 160c, 1005G RAM, so we could start with 112c to match all other runners in terms of vcpus
Main Beta changes: xiph/awcy#360 {Dockerimage update + build support for rav1e}