Date: Mon, 27 May 2019 11:06:43 +0100 From: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@gmail.com> To: Shawn Webb <shawn.webb@hardenedbsd.org> Cc: virtualization@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bhyve/arm64 status Message-ID: <CAB-4s4=hdjfQe0mQSvqzw=eoc1axsB9NVKmMBetBh%2BFqB5o7eQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20190527013609.dl6zup3rinzh3tw4@mutt-hbsd> References: <20190527013609.dl6zup3rinzh3tw4@mutt-hbsd>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, I've been working on bhyve for arm64. For the CPUs that you have posted: - Overdrive, pine64, pinebook and rock64 don't support bhyvearm64, because they have an older version of the interrupt controller (GIC400 vs GIC500). - RPI3 doesn't support bhyvearm64, because it has a custom interrupt controller. - ThunderX2 will support bhyvearm64 in its current state, however the hypervisor won't take advantage of some important virtualization optimizations that the CPU implements. bhyvearm64 hasn't been tested on hardware, but Mihai is considering the espressobin platform for hardware bringup. On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 2:37 AM Shawn Webb <shawn.webb@hardenedbsd.org> wrote: > Hey all, > > I'm trying to figure out the state of bhyve on arm64 in 13-current. I > have two SoftIron OverDrive 1000s, a bajillion RPI3s, a Pine64, > Rock64, and PineBook, and a ThunderX2. Punish me. > > Thanks, > > -- > Shawn Webb > Cofounder / Security Engineer > HardenedBSD > > Tor-ified Signal: +1 443-546-8752 > Tor+XMPP+OTR: lattera@is.a.hacker.sx > GPG Key ID: 0xFF2E67A277F8E1FA > GPG Key Fingerprint: D206 BB45 15E0 9C49 0CF9 3633 C85B 0AF8 AB23 0FB2 >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAB-4s4=hdjfQe0mQSvqzw=eoc1axsB9NVKmMBetBh%2BFqB5o7eQ>