> On Jun 1, 2023, at 1:18 PM, Tomasz Maciej Nowak <tmn...@gmail.com> wrote: > > W dniu 1.06.2023 o 18:58, Philip Prindeville pisze: >> Hi, > > Hi. > >> I'm thinking about the utility of being able to build a generalized ARM64 >> image (not "armvirt") for bring up on new platforms for testing. >> >> There are a lot of generalized computing platforms like the Ampere Altra >> servers that you might want to use as in inbound Apache proxy server, a load >> balancer, a traffic shaper, etc. >> >> Can we add a generic target for ARM64 just as x86_64 (or x86/64) is the >> generic AMD64 target? >> >> I'd like something that I could easily run on a Graviton2 or Altra or Ten64, >> etc. >> >> Also not clear to me why the various ARM targets like "layerscape", "imx", >> "octeontx", etc. don't live under a common directory. >> >> Yes, ARM is more optimized for SoCs that have I/O on-chip and hence there's >> less mix-n-match compared to x86, but it's not completely unheard of either. >> >> What do you all think of adding a generic target for aarch64? >> >> And how awful would refactoring arm and aarch64 be? > > Did You overlook this message > http://lists.openwrt.org/pipermail/openwrt-devel/2023-May/041091.html ? > Posted a week ago.
I did in fact miss this message. > It's modifying armvirt target to boot it effortlessly on arm64 hardware. I think having an image with drivers built in for virtualization only is fine, but another more full-featured image for actual bare metal would also be good. > The name of target stays but that's only a name. > >> Thanks, >> >> -Philip > > Regards > > -- > TMN _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
