Neal H. Walfield
neal at ...8...
Sun Oct 27 15:07:40 CET 2013
Thank you very much for these details!
At Sat, 26 Oct 2013 14:44:56 +0200,
Christian Helmuth wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 10:23:24PM +0200, Neal H. Walfield wrote:
> > In terms of Genode support, where does Fiasco.OC rank? Is the current
> > focus on a custom kernel (which I guess is the bare hardware
> > solution)?
> First, the base-hw kernel is our first choice when exploring new
> grounds, e.g., porting to new ARM platforms or testing specific ARM
> features like TrustZone. For us, base-hw is the least complex Genode
> platform and we have a thorough understanding of its internals.
This sounds a bit different from the story that Martin told (cf. his
message from October 24 with Message-ID:
<5268F5E1.6000407 at ...1...>).
Is the intention that the base-hw remain experimental? Or, is the
long-term plan to make it a proper microkernel? From what you say
here, it sounds like I shouldn't consider base-hw as a potential
microkernel. Martin, however, seems to suggest it will become a
viable target in the near future.
More information about the users