Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 17:06:11 -0800 From: Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> To: Russell Haley <russ.haley@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-arm <freebsd-arm@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: i.MX8 Support? Message-ID: <F80FBF2C-1185-4BED-A2C4-4139E7B9DDEA@yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <CABx9NuQxFsvgjx9_hfdgRq3hGBH_JiFL763pXtEjXm=H%2BSmS2g@mail.gmail.com> References: <CABx9NuQxFsvgjx9_hfdgRq3hGBH_JiFL763pXtEjXm=H%2BSmS2g@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Feb 14, 2025, at 16:22, Russell Haley <russ.haley@gmail.com> wrote: > It's been a long time since I've lurked on this list. The Arm wiki = says that aarch64 is tier 1 and "well supported" but I only see images = for RPI, ROCK and PINE. Tier 1 status does not imply pre-existing support for a wide variety of incompatible/non-standardized small arm boards that happen to have aarch64 cores involved. *.dtb content is not just about aarch64 processor/set-of-cores details. Where standards are in place and more effective, FreeBSD has an easier time supporting a variety of systems, such as servers that meet various server related standards. An example issue could be the expectation for UEFI/ACPI for servers (and more) where less system-specific code ends up in the FreeBSD kernel compared to tracking Linux *.dtb content than ends up with in the kernel for small arm boards. (*.dtb's do not provide code for any processing, unlike ACPI which can provide an interface that handles a wider variety via code outside FreeBSD.) Some aspects of things are "well supported" most everywhere but coverage of full system level issues ends up with too much variety to deal with for FreeBSD's resources when it comes to small arm boards. > Does this mean I need to build my own i.MX8 image It would not be surprising if some kernel development was required, not just "building". > or are NXP processors not supported in aarch64? The issues are probably primarily not just "processor"/set-of-cores internal issues but other things on the board or in the SoC. > I tried searching the mailing list archive on marc, but there were no = search results for mx8 or imx8.=20 It may be that there is no i.MX8 interested FreeBSD kernel developer active. (I've no clue.) > I'm specifically hoping to support Phytec i.MX8 M Plus (quad core = Cortex A-53). = https://www.phytec.eu/en/produkte/system-on-modules/phycore-imx-8m-plus/ There is definitely support for some small arm boards with a quad core Cortex-A53 being what is used. But that does not imply things are going to just work at the SoC or board level for a different SoC and/or board than happens to already be supported. > Does FreeBSD support NPUs? (No, I don't know what I mean...) =3D=3D=3D Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F80FBF2C-1185-4BED-A2C4-4139E7B9DDEA>