Re: Freebsd on M1 Macs

Thomas Sparrevohn <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.os.freebsd.devel.arm
Message-ID <[email protected]>
As I said to Joe in a previous post - I am personally quite impressed of how easy it was go get up and running - granted it crashes with >8 Cores - but Under parallels it ran well - making a very long term BSD user very very happy - Looking at both Linux and NetBSD - (NetBSD randomly freezes with >8 Cores) but both seems doggy when it comes to how it handles efficiency cores. What got me to go back to FreeBSD - was 

A) I really miss it but since I got rid of my PC's there seems to be no option
B) I do understand the codebase 
C) Nobody seems to have a consistent approach to scheduling 

E.g. Mac OS X uses QoS to control affinity, everybody else uses "affinity" - but "setaffinity" seems like taking a hammer to the schedular - So I wanted to understand. ARM as such is a bit of a mess in as much there are a very varied number of CPU and designs - but at the same time this is why ARM is such an interesting design. But Personally I am still a bit unsure what acronym  or branding covers platform. Looking at two different - if somewhat exotic applications - E.g. A mainframe emulator and GNU APL who both hard relies on the assumption that binding to a specific CPU will give you the best performance, personally I think that assumption is the intellectually the same as running everything under rtprio    - it seems that assumptions are being made in the wild that will break once you have asymmetric CPU's - So I think we - I mean the FreeBSD camp -  has some work to do - If POSIX or others codify the state of "Now" we end up with the same mess as pthreads ended up being. 

After all that I really wanted to thank everybody who has worked on ARM for allowing me to get back to having FreeBSD running on my daily workhorse - it's really a work well done

Regards
	Thomas  

On 26/11/2023, 23:52, "Kyle Evans" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> on behalf of [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:


On 11/26/23 16:04, Jason Bacon wrote:
> On 11/26/23 13:22, Joe B wrote:
>>
>> I know this is a longshot but I'm going to ask I know MacOS is a BSD 
>> but we all know it's very sugarcoated and doesn't look like a BSD.
>>
>> Question will real freeBSD ever come to the m1 Mac's. I got a 16 inch 
>> mbp with good specs just taking up space right now
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> ~ Joe B
> 
> I assume you've seen https://wiki.freebsd.org/AppleSilicon <https://wiki.freebsd.org/AppleSilicon>. Not sure 
> how up-to-date it is. The wikis tend to lag behind reality in my 
> experience.
> 


Yeah, this is a bit out of date. SMP and watchdog bits are good, along 
with some subset of the USB ports (IOMMU is a WIP). With the branch I'm 
working on right now, we can go full multi-user on a USB root. Work
stalled for a bit because there was a general disagreement with how we 
integrated parts of the interrupt control into the interrupt framework, 
but I've been given a vision recently of a clear path forward, so 
hopefully we can move forward with that and unblock upstreaming some of 
the other bits.


Thanks,


Kyle Evans
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.