Support for ARM chips found in macOS Sierra Kernel

[kiu77]

This never will happen. Under Jobs they developped not without sense a new OS for iDevices. Going backward as MS did (and got **** as result) is completely crazy.

 

[jonhendry]

It has been rumored for quite some time, that Apple may switch to ARM for their Mac products. Now there's some solid evidence that Apple is looking into other directions.
macOS Sierra code suggests Apple could replace Intel in Macs with custom ARM chips

Cue the "end of hackintosh is nigh?" discussion.

I wouldn't make too much of it. The same file contains:

#define CPU_TYPE_MC98000 ((cpu_type_t) 10)

#define CPU_TYPE_HPPA ((cpu_type_t) 11)

#define CPU_TYPE_ARM ((cpu_type_t) 12)

#define CPU_TYPE_ARM64 (CPU_TYPE_ARM | CPU_ARCH_ABI64)

#define CPU_TYPE_MC88000 ((cpu_type_t) 13)

#define CPU_TYPE_SPARC ((cpu_type_t) 14)

#define CPU_TYPE_I860 ((cpu_type_t) 15)

#define CPU_TYPE_POWERPC ((cpu_type_t) 18)

#define CPU_TYPE_POWERPC64 (CPU_TYPE_POWERPC | CPU_ARCH_ABI64)

#define CPU_SUBTYPE_VAX_ALL ((cpu_subtype_t) 0)

#define CPU_SUBTYPE_VAX780 ((cpu_subtype_t) 1)

#define CPU_SUBTYPE_VAX785 ((cpu_subtype_t) 2)

#define CPU_SUBTYPE_VAX750 ((cpu_subtype_t) 3)

#define CPU_SUBTYPE_VAX730 ((cpu_subtype_t) 4)

#define CPU_SUBTYPE_UVAXI ((cpu_subtype_t) 5)

#define CPU_SUBTYPE_UVAXII ((cpu_subtype_t) 6)

#define CPU_SUBTYPE_VAX8200 ((cpu_subtype_t) 7)

#define CPU_SUBTYPE_VAX8500 ((cpu_subtype_t) 8)

#define CPU_SUBTYPE_VAX8600 ((cpu_subtype_t) 9)

#define CPU_SUBTYPE_VAX8650 ((cpu_subtype_t) 10)

#define CPU_SUBTYPE_VAX8800 ((cpu_subtype_t) 11)

#define CPU_SUBTYPE_UVAXIII ((cpu_subtype_t) 12)

Most of these are from old versions of Mach. Apple isn't going to be supporting the Intel i860 or Vax any time soon.

The part of the code that defines the Arm Hurricane is this:

/*

* CPU families (sysctl hw.cpufamily)

*

* These are meant to identify the CPU's marketing name - an

* application can map these to (possibly) localized strings.

* NB: the encodings of the CPU families are intentionally arbitrary.

* There is no ordering, and you should never try to deduce whether

* or not some feature is available based on the family.

* Use feature flags (eg, hw.optional.altivec) to test for optional

* functionality.

*/

#define CPUFAMILY_UNKNOWN 0

#define CPUFAMILY_POWERPC_G3 0xcee41549

#define CPUFAMILY_POWERPC_G4 0x77c184ae

#define CPUFAMILY_POWERPC_G5 0xed76d8aa

#define CPUFAMILY_INTEL_6_13 0xaa33392b

#define CPUFAMILY_INTEL_PENRYN 0x78ea4fbc

#define CPUFAMILY_INTEL_NEHALEM 0x6b5a4cd2

#define CPUFAMILY_INTEL_WESTMERE 0x573b5eec

#define CPUFAMILY_INTEL_SANDYBRIDGE 0x5490b78c

#define CPUFAMILY_INTEL_IVYBRIDGE 0x1f65e835

#define CPUFAMILY_INTEL_HASWELL 0x10b282dc

#define CPUFAMILY_INTEL_BROADWELL 0x582ed09c

#define CPUFAMILY_INTEL_SKYLAKE 0x37fc219f

#define CPUFAMILY_INTEL_KABYLAKE 0x0f817246

#define CPUFAMILY_ARM_9 0xe73283ae

#define CPUFAMILY_ARM_11 0x8ff620d8

#define CPUFAMILY_ARM_XSCALE 0x53b005f5

#define CPUFAMILY_ARM_12 0xbd1b0ae9

#define CPUFAMILY_ARM_13 0x0cc90e64

#define CPUFAMILY_ARM_14 0x96077ef1

#define CPUFAMILY_ARM_15 0xa8511bca

#define CPUFAMILY_ARM_SWIFT 0x1e2d6381

#define CPUFAMILY_ARM_CYCLONE 0x37a09642

#define CPUFAMILY_ARM_TYPHOON 0x2c91a47e

#define CPUFAMILY_ARM_TWISTER 0x92fb37c8

#define CPUFAMILY_ARM_HURRICANE 0x67ceee93

#define CPUFAMILY_ARM_MONSOON_MISTRAL 0xe81e7ef6

Obviously Apple isn't going to be supporting the G3 any time soon either.

Furthermore, this header is probably shared between iOS and macOS, so it isn't necessarily indicative of the direction of macOS.

 

[jonhendry]

Which means that iOS and macOS would both run on the same hardware

No it doesn't. There's more to hardware than just the CPU. The lightning Digital AV adapter has an ARM CPU inside it. It runs a hugely stripped down Mach OS with a bit of iOS to do video decompression. You couldn't run full iOS on it. Mac Quadras and NeXT Cubes both ran on Motorola 68040 CPUs, but you couldn't install System 7 on a NeXT or NeXTSTEP on a Quadra.

Perhaps an ARM-based Mac could be hacked to run iOS, but it wouldn't be a supported configuration or a situation a user could stumble into.

 

[ckykenken]

I've heard news that Apple may replace Intel CPU with Apple's own ones on all Macs…and drop Intel support
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/09/29/apple-interested-processors-modems/
#riphackintosh…in the near future

 

[guslima]

Perhaps an ARM-based Mac could be hacked to run iOS, but it wouldn't be a supported configuration or a situation a user could stumble into.

Or we could just think about QEMU ARM64 emulation, and we could get the supposed new macOS ARM64 based operating system up and running on our regular x84_64 machines. Could be a totally new way for the hackintosh community.

 

[TheFox88]

I think Apple will only switch to ARM if they can improve something over the current situation. May it be thinner devices or longer battery runtime, or ...

But, if Apple does something others will also do the same (only USB-C on a Notebook? -> Guess what, Dell does it too on the XPS 13 now, and many others will follow). What does this mean? If others follow, there will again non-apple hardware be available on the market which can be possible hackintosh. So don't worry.

 

[guslima]

What does this mean? If others follow, there will again non-apple hardware be available on the market which can be possible hackintosh. So don't worry.

And we already have Asus NovaGo coming out on the market soon. What we should discover is what kind of "protections" will Apple put on their devices if they really change to ARM64 architecture, basically what we already did when Apple changed to the x86 architecture. So, I see no problem here.