On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 06:10:19PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 1 July 2014 18:03, Stefano Stabellini
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Jun 2014, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> How about:
> >> =
> >> Guest OSes in the VM image should rely on the UEFI RTC API for
> >> real time clock services. (To provide
On 1 July 2014 18:03, Stefano Stabellini
wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2014, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> How about:
>> =
>> Guest OSes in the VM image should rely on the UEFI RTC API for
>> real time clock services. (To provide that API, the VM system will
>> likely need to implement some real time cloc
On Mon, 30 Jun 2014, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 30 June 2014 21:46, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > Seems like we should stick a note in there about being UEFI compatible
> > requires an RTC. We went this far before Peter raised the issue with
> > noone else realizing it, so it seems like a good idea
On 30 June 2014 21:46, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> Seems like we should stick a note in there about being UEFI compatible
> requires an RTC. We went this far before Peter raised the issue with
> noone else realizing it, so it seems like a good idea to me.
How about:
=
Guest OSes in the VM imag
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:19:15PM -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
> On 6/11/14, 5:06 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >On Wednesday 11 June 2014 10:16:03 Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >>
> >>>If kernels actually do use the UEFI runtime services and have no need
> >>>for direct access to an RTC when runing in a UEFI
On 6/11/14, 5:06 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Wednesday 11 June 2014 10:16:03 Paolo Bonzini wrote:
If kernels actually do use the UEFI runtime services and have no need
for direct access to an RTC when runing in a UEFI compliant system, then
I agree with not specifying the hardware details.
T
On 11 June 2014 12:33, Grant Likely wrote:
> In practical terms, yes the VM needs to provide an RTC interface, but
> I don't think it needs to appear in this spec, even if the kernel
> accesses it directly. Portable images should use the UEFI service.
I think it might helpful to include some impl
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 12:28:40PM +0100, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Christoffer Dall
> wrote:
> > Agree with what Stefano says, and I strongly recommend you reconsider
> > your position on FDT vs. ACPI for ARM VMs, but it's completely up to
> > you of course :)
>
> N
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 June 2014 12:33:30 Grant Likely wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 7:56 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> > Il 10/06/2014 20:08, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
>> >
>> >> On 10 June 2014 18:04, Christopher Covington wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>
On Wednesday 11 June 2014 12:33:30 Grant Likely wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 7:56 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > Il 10/06/2014 20:08, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
> >
> >> On 10 June 2014 18:04, Christopher Covington wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 06/10/2014 10:42 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>
> I j
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 7:56 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 10/06/2014 20:08, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
>
>> On 10 June 2014 18:04, Christopher Covington wrote:
>>>
>>> On 06/10/2014 10:42 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
I just noticed that this doesn't mandate that the platform
provides a
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Christoffer Dall
wrote:
> Agree with what Stefano says, and I strongly recommend you reconsider
> your position on FDT vs. ACPI for ARM VMs, but it's completely up to
> you of course :)
Not entirely. The plan right now is to only support ACPI when booting
with UE
On 10 Jun 2014 17:45, "Claudio Fontana" wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I just wanted to share with you guys how we are using virtualization on ARM64
> over here for the OSv project.
> I don't know if that's something that could be useful for your specification
> effort.
>
> In OSv, creating and start
On Wednesday 11 June 2014 10:50:04 Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> Although not in the ARM VM System Specification, Xen is certainly going
> to support a fast boot path without UEFI firmware. I guess KVM will too.
> You'll have to rely on hypervisor specific mechanisms to achieve it.
>
> In fact I wou
Agree with what Stefano says, and I strongly recommend you reconsider
your position on FDT vs. ACPI for ARM VMs, but it's completely up to
you of course :)
-Christoffer
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:50:04AM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> Although not in the ARM VM System Specification, Xen is ce
Although not in the ARM VM System Specification, Xen is certainly going
to support a fast boot path without UEFI firmware. I guess KVM will too.
You'll have to rely on hypervisor specific mechanisms to achieve it.
In fact I wouldn't worry about UEFI when you need ACPI, that is not in
this specific
On Wednesday 11 June 2014 10:16:03 Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> > If kernels actually do use the UEFI runtime services and have no need
> > for direct access to an RTC when runing in a UEFI compliant system, then
> > I agree with not specifying the hardware details.
>
> The RTC is not needed for ordi
Il 11/06/2014 08:54, Christoffer Dall ha scritto:
The problem is that the most common user problem with ARM VMs are that
they boot the thing, and then get no output. So we wanted some way to
make sure we know that the kernel should be able to print to a console.
UEFI does provide DBG2 output, b
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 09:18:34PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 10/06/2014 20:56, Paolo Bonzini ha scritto:
> >Il 10/06/2014 20:08, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
> >>On 10 June 2014 18:04, Christopher Covington wrote:
> >>>On 06/10/2014 10:42 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> I just noticed that this
On Tuesday 10 June 2014 18:44:59 Claudio Fontana wrote:
> I just wanted to share with you guys how we are using virtualization
> on ARM64 over here for the OSv project.
> By skipping steps like UEFI, grub, firmware load, etc we strive to
> keep our application launch time low.
> Is this going to cr
Il 10/06/2014 20:56, Paolo Bonzini ha scritto:
Il 10/06/2014 20:08, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
On 10 June 2014 18:04, Christopher Covington wrote:
On 06/10/2014 10:42 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
I just noticed that this doesn't mandate that the platform
provides an RTC. As I understand it, the UE
Il 10/06/2014 20:56, Paolo Bonzini ha scritto:
Il 10/06/2014 20:08, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
On 10 June 2014 18:04, Christopher Covington wrote:
On 06/10/2014 10:42 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
I just noticed that this doesn't mandate that the platform
provides an RTC. As I understand it, the UE
Il 10/06/2014 20:08, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
On 10 June 2014 18:04, Christopher Covington wrote:
On 06/10/2014 10:42 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
I just noticed that this doesn't mandate that the platform
provides an RTC. As I understand it, the UEFI spec mandates
that there's an RTC (could some
On 10 June 2014 18:04, Christopher Covington wrote:
> On 06/10/2014 10:42 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> I just noticed that this doesn't mandate that the platform
>> provides an RTC. As I understand it, the UEFI spec mandates
>> that there's an RTC (could somebody more familiar with UEFI
>> than me
Hi Peter,
On 06/10/2014 10:42 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 28 March 2014 18:45, Christoffer Dall wrote:
>> ARM VM System Specification
>> ===
>>
>
>> The virtual hardware platform must provide a number of mandatory
>> peripherals:
>>
>> Serial console: The platform sh
Il 10/06/2014 16:42, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
The guest OS must include support for pl031 and mc146818 RTC.
(QEMU is going to provide a PL031, because that's the standard
ARM primecell device for this and it's what's in the vexpress.
kvmtool looks like it's going to provide mc146818, because
t
Hello all,
I just wanted to share with you guys how we are using virtualization on ARM64
over here for the OSv project.
I don't know if that's something that could be useful for your specification
effort.
In OSv, creating and starting a VM to some level means starting an application.
That is, O
On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 15:42 +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 28 March 2014 18:45, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > ARM VM System Specification
> > ===
> >
>
> > The virtual hardware platform must provide a number of mandatory
> > peripherals:
> >
> > Serial console: The plat
On 28 March 2014 18:45, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> ARM VM System Specification
> ===
>
> The virtual hardware platform must provide a number of mandatory
> peripherals:
>
> Serial console: The platform should provide a console,
> based on an emulated pl011, a virtio-co
On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 07:42:06 -0700, Christoffer Dall
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:45:17AM -0700, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > ARM VM System Specification
> > ===
> >
>
> I didn't receive a lot of comments on this one, I take this to mean that
> most people are happ
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:45:17AM -0700, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> ARM VM System Specification
> ===
>
I didn't receive a lot of comments on this one, I take this to mean that
most people are happy with the content. If not, now is the time to
speak up, otherwise we'll be
Start with Linaro publishing it. It can always be moved to another
venue if someone dislikes Linaro having maintainership.
g.
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:57 AM, Michael Casadevall
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
>
> On 04/01/2014 05:49 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> On Mo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/01/2014 05:49 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-03-31 at 10:26 -0700, Christoffer Dall wrote:
>> However, that may be a pain to update
>
> Very much, and there would be nothing worse than having multiple
> divergent copies of the spec.
>
On Mon, 2014-03-31 at 10:26 -0700, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> However, that may be a pain to update
Very much, and there would be nothing worse than having multiple
divergent copies of the spec.
> so the preferred method could be
> to host it in either its current form (clear-text) or publish som
On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 03:10:50PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Christoffer Dall
> wrote:
> > ARM VM System Specification
> > ===
>
> [not quoting the whole spec here]
>
> This looks very sane to me, and aligns very well with non-virtua
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Christoffer Dall
wrote:
> ARM VM System Specification
> ===
[not quoting the whole spec here]
This looks very sane to me, and aligns very well with non-virtualized images.
For what it's worth, even though it's not a patch:
Acked-by: Olo
ARM VM System Specification
===
Goal
The goal of this spec is to allow suitably-built OS images to run on
all ARM virtualization solutions, such as KVM or Xen.
Recommendations in this spec are valid for aarch32 and aarch64 alike, and
they aim to be hypervisor agnostic
37 matches
Mail list logo
