Graviton with Nitro 4 has been quite pleasant to use, with the rust aarch64 musl static target and rust-lld I can build monolith ELFs that work not just on my android via `adb push` and `adb shell` but also on AWS.
AWS with Nitro v3+ iirc supports TPM, meaning I can attest my VM state via an Amazon CA. I know ARM has been working a lot with Rust, and it shows - binfmt with qemu-user mean I often forget which architecture I'm building/running/testing as the binaries seem to work the same everywhere.
Can someone please confirm, is the Graviton an ARM-based CPU or something different? The page mentioned ARM, but I was still a little confused. Are we able to launch a Debian/Fedora using the CPU, or is meant for something different?
Yes, the gravatons are the AWS arm architecture instances
Thanks, so "standard" ARM we can launch VMs with? I wasn't sure if this was some sort of proprietary ARM chip use for specialized work.
As far as I'm aware- if it's called an ARM CPU it's either the v7 or v8 instruction set with the possibility of extra instructions (changes to ARM die) or a tightly integrated coprocessor (via AXI bus, adjacent to the ARM silicon on the same substrate).
There are different Coretex series that optimize for different things- A and X for applications (phones, cloud compute, SBCs, desktops and laptops), M for microcontrollers, and R for realtime.
This doesn't apply if the company has an ARM founder and/or architecture license. (I think that's what they're called) Eg- Apple and their M series SOCs are not Coretex cores, but share the base instruction set- but only if Apple wants it to.
Yup, Amazon supports the 6.11? kernel on aarch64. Most toolchains if you target linux aarch64 static they, they will produce executables that will run on Amazon Linux aarch64 and Android, set-top boxes with 64-bit chips and Linux 3+ it's surprising how many devices a static aarch64 ELF will run on.
Awesome, thanks for this. Off to build new Ansible deployment scripts for aarch64!
Yes, think AMD vs Intel. Same x86 target but built differently under the hood with potential to optimize for certain uses over others.
Are they updating the t class instances to t5g as well?
Wouldn't the business impact always be performance per dollar from client perspective? This reads like a document that's meant to convince AWS management to invest in the new chip, focusing on how it's maximally flexible for sale, not a document to convince customers to use it ...
It's an advertisement to investors that they have a new product that's better than their last