Hi, Christian, 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: <[email protected]>). 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. Thanks, :) Neal ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60135991&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Genode-main mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/genode-main
