Re: [MirageOS-devel] some pointers for xen/arm on cubie2

[Anil Madhavapeddy <anil@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 4 Feb 2014, at 17:01, Mike McClurg <mike.mcclurg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Anil Madhavapeddy <anil@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

As for a MiniOS to get Mirage up on ARM, Julien suggested that a stripped down FreeBSD would be easier than a MiniOS, which I quite like given that sharing the header files with FreeBSD will make porting the kFreeBSD backend easier too in the medium term.  The FreeBSD Xen/ARM working git tree is here:

http://xenbits.xen.org/gitweb/?p=people/julieng/freebsd.git;a=tree;f=sys/arm/xenhvm;h=26ec9810bc775e24f08d18547a84ebba44792cf0;hb=xen-arm

Might NetBSD's rump kernels also be a good replacement for MiniOS? From what I can tell, FreeBSD's ARM support is better than NetBSD's, so this is a moot point for the Cubie discussion. I was mostly just wondering what your thoughts were on a NetBSD rump kernel versus a stripped down FreeBSD kernel.

Either would suitable, but given that we have a kernel-module FreeBSD backend already and FreeBSD Xen/ARM already, I don't see the point of considering anything else in the short term.  It should be quite straightforward to port the OCaml runtime to rump kernels on NetBSD for any interested party.

-anil

_______________________________________________
MirageOS-devel mailing list
MirageOS-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xenproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mirageos-devel