kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core
Hi every one My understanding is that one uses the amd64 for building a kernel for systems with Intel Quad Core processors. It is helpful when naming conventions follow a logical strand. I mean why does freebsd use a single manufacturer's name to represent a genre? David ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core
On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 02:14:49PM +0100, David Southwell wrote: > Hi every one > > My understanding is that one uses the amd64 for building a kernel for systems > with Intel Quad Core processors. That depends on if you installed the amd64 version of FreeBSD or the i386 version. The kernel should of course match the rest of the system. Intel's Quad Core processors (at least all the models they have released so far) supports both amd64 and i386. (i386 being 32-bit, while amd64 is 64-bit.) > > It is helpful when naming conventions follow a logical strand. I mean why > does > freebsd use a single manufacturer's name to represent a genre? The amd64 architecture is called that because it was AMD who invented and created it and was for a while the only one using it and since AMD named the architecture AMD64 that was the name FreeBSD used too. Later Intel also started using it (while using their own name(s) for it), but FreeBSD has stuck with the name amd64. This is no more strange than calling the i386 architecture for i386 even if it runs on a whole lot of processors other than the original Intel 80386. -- Erik Trulsson ertr1...@student.uu.se ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core
On Wednesday 05 August 2009 15:14:49 David Southwell wrote: > Hi every one > > My understanding is that one uses the amd64 for building a kernel for > systems with Intel Quad Core processors. > > It is helpful when naming conventions follow a logical strand. I mean why > does freebsd use a single manufacturer's name to represent a genre? Because it's technically correct, as I understand it. Unless I've got this wrong (in which case I'm sure someone will shout), there were initially two 64-bit instruction sets, amd64 from AMD and ia64 from Intel. ia64 saw so little uptake that Intel started using the AMD instruction set, but amd64 is still the appropriate description for most 64-bit processors these daya regardless of manufacturer. Jonathan ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core
David Southwell wrote: > Hi every one > > My understanding is that one uses the amd64 for building a kernel for systems > with Intel Quad Core processors. > > It is helpful when naming conventions follow a logical strand. I mean why > does > freebsd use a single manufacturer's name to represent a genre? > > David > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > One would use the amd64 version of FreeBSD on 64-bit platforms (apart from the itanium platforms). the amd64 or x86-64 instuction set has been designed by amd, which called it amd64. Intel implemented amd's design in their EM64T or "Intel 64" instruction set, which is compatible with amd's implementation(mostly IS amd's implementation). As such, amd64 is as valid a platform name as IA64(or Itanium) is. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core
> On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 02:14:49PM +0100, David Southwell wrote: > > Hi every one > > > > My understanding is that one uses the amd64 for building a kernel for > > systems with Intel Quad Core processors. > > That depends on if you installed the amd64 version of FreeBSD or the i386 > version. The kernel should of course match the rest of the system. > Intel's Quad Core processors (at least all the models they have released so > far) supports both amd64 and i386. (i386 being 32-bit, while amd64 is > 64-bit.) > > > It is helpful when naming conventions follow a logical strand. I mean why > > does freebsd use a single manufacturer's name to represent a genre? > > The amd64 architecture is called that because it was AMD who invented and > created it and was for a while the only one using it and since AMD named > the architecture AMD64 that was the name FreeBSD used too. Later Intel > also started using it (while using their own name(s) for it), but FreeBSD > has stuck with the name amd64. This is no more strange than calling the > i386 architecture for i386 even if it runs on a whole lot of processors > other than the original Intel 80386. I would still be inclined to feel that although the naming convention can be historically justified it remains practically illogical!!! Naming conventions work well when they help people understand what they represent. To illustrate my point at one time Britain referred as "the British Empire" but such a title would be laughable today!! There is enough for people to get their head around in understanding what is going on without adding additional levels of confusion because noone thought of future developments!! However this is not an argument anyone is likely to get steamed up about -- however illogical it may be david ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core
David Southwell wrote: >> David Southwell wrote: >> >>> Hi every one >>> >>> My understanding is that one uses the amd64 for building a kernel for >>> systems with Intel Quad Core processors. >>> >>> It is helpful when naming conventions follow a logical strand. I mean why >>> does freebsd use a single manufacturer's name to represent a genre? >>> >>> David >>> >>> ___ >>> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list >>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions >>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >>> "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" >>> >> One would use the amd64 version of FreeBSD on 64-bit platforms (apart >> from the itanium platforms). >> the amd64 or x86-64 instuction set has been designed by amd, which >> called it amd64. >> Intel implemented amd's design in their EM64T or "Intel 64" instruction >> set, which is compatible with amd's implementation(mostly IS amd's >> implementation). >> As such, amd64 is as valid a platform name as IA64(or Itanium) is. >> > > That is undoubtably true -- what it also means is that both names are equally > logical or illogical depending upon your point of view. > > My view is that both are equally illogical because they are tied to a > manufacturer rather than to function. Names are best chosen to facilitate > selection by single step logic that encapsulates what the name represents > rather than by having an abstruse historical context that has neglible > bearing > upon current function. > > my 2 p > > But lets not get worked up about this > > david > > > > You make a good point. It would be more "logical" and maybe even more "correct" to call it x86-64. This would however imply that any x86-64 implementation is supported. This is probably the case now, though i am unsure if freeBSD amd64 works on for instance via platforms. Since x86-64 isn't exactly an ISO standard, and amd64 is(http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=43784), it's not strange to name the branch that has been developed to work on amd's implementation of x86-64 is called amd64. Besides, I am a real AMD fanboy when it comes to processors... so why would I want that? ;-) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core
On Wednesday 05 August 2009 05:27:55 Erik Trulsson wrote: > The amd64 architecture is called that because it was AMD who invented and > created it and was for a while the only one using it and since AMD named > the architecture AMD64 that was the name FreeBSD used too. Later Intel > also started using it (while using their own name(s) for it), but FreeBSD > has stuck with the name amd64. This isn't completely correct. There is actually an ia64 architecture, before Intel was ready to give up the "who dictates the PC 64bit architecture" battle. There's a handful of CPU's who use that instruction set, but later Intel switched to supporting AMD's instruction set and thus the PC 64 bit architecture now is amd64. It'll be fun to see people asking in a few years why Oracle processors are called "sparc64"... -- Mel ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core
Mel Flynn wrote: > On Wednesday 05 August 2009 05:27:55 Erik Trulsson wrote: > > >> The amd64 architecture is called that because it was AMD who invented and >> created it and was for a while the only one using it and since AMD named >> the architecture AMD64 that was the name FreeBSD used too. Later Intel >> also started using it (while using their own name(s) for it), but FreeBSD >> has stuck with the name amd64. >> > > This isn't completely correct. There is actually an ia64 architecture, before > Intel was ready to give up the "who dictates the PC 64bit architecture" > battle. There's a handful of CPU's who use that instruction set, but later > Intel switched to supporting AMD's instruction set and thus the PC 64 bit > architecture now is amd64. > > It'll be fun to see people asking in a few years why Oracle processors are > called "sparc64"... > Now I come to think of it, isn't it strange apple(or IBM) never joined in the whole 64-bits naming race spactacle. No one ever calls a PowerPC 970 processor a PowerPC-64, or a IBM64 or anything like it... Nor have I ever heard the term RISC64. Too bad we won't have to worry about that anymore, since PowerPC is dead and Mac Pro's are now amd64(or Intel 64 or x86-64 whichever would be the "correct" term ;-) ) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core
Mark Stapper wrote: > ... PowerPC is dead ... I suspect both IBM and Freescale would beg to differ :) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core
per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: > Mark Stapper wrote: > >> ... PowerPC is dead ... >> Well yes (lousy excuse coming up!) I meant in the PC/Mac world... ;-) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core
Hi, On 06 August 2009 pm 14:35:40 Mark Stapper wrote: > Mel Flynn wrote: > > On Wednesday 05 August 2009 05:27:55 Erik Trulsson wrote: > >> The amd64 architecture is called that because it was AMD who > >> invented and created it and was for a while the only one > > Now I come to think of it, isn't it strange apple(or IBM) never > joined in the whole 64-bits naming race spactacle. Because people using them, new what they were doing. > Nor have I ever heard the term RISC64. Too bad we won't have to > worry about that anymore, since PowerPC is dead and Mac Pro's > are now amd64(or Intel 64 or x86-64 whichever would be the IA 64? Wans't this once - or still is - the term used for the Itanium? Yes, also Intel can fail. Intel also failed with their first 32 bit design. Wasn't iAPX-32 ist name? Long before the 80386 came up? Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core
Erich Dollansky wrote: > Because people using them, new what they were doing. > And probably didn't care... > IA 64? Wans't this once - or still is - the term used for the > Itanium? > The one that didn't stick... indeed. > Yes, also Intel can fail. Intel also failed with their first 32 > bit design. Wasn't iAPX-32 ist name? Long before the 80386 came > up? > As I was an embryo when the 80386 was first produced, I searched for this one... Possibally the same thing though: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_iAPX_432 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core
Hi, On 06 August 2009 pm 16:40:41 Mark Stapper wrote: > Erich Dollansky wrote: > > > IA 64? Wans't this once - or still is - the term used for the > > Itanium? > > The one that didn't stick... indeed. do they really sell machines with this CPU in numbers? I have not seen one in the wild. > > > Yes, also Intel can fail. Intel also failed with their first > > 32 bit design. Wasn't iAPX-32 ist name? Long before the 80386 > > came up? > > As I was an embryo when the 80386 was first produced, I > searched for this one... > Possibally the same thing though: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_iAPX_432 Oh, yes, the 4 was missing. Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core
On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 05:18:09PM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote: > Hi, > > On 06 August 2009 pm 16:40:41 Mark Stapper wrote: > > Erich Dollansky wrote: > > > > > IA 64? Wans't this once - or still is - the term used for the > > > Itanium? > > > > The one that didn't stick... indeed. > > do they really sell machines with this CPU in numbers? Yes, but not very large numbers - especially not compared to x86 machines. According to some estimates quoted in the Wikipedia article on Itanium, Intel manufactures around 200,000 Itanium CPUs per year, which translates to a far smaller number of machines since most of them are multi-CPU systems. By far the largest seller of Itanium-based systems is HP (which also partnered with Intel in creating the IA64 architecture in the first place.) > > I have not seen one in the wild. Not surprising since the Itanium is mainly used in the kind of high-end server systems that us ordinary people rarely see and certainly can't afford to buy. -- Erik Trulsson ertr1...@student.uu.se ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core
On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 14:14:49 +0100 David Southwell wrote: > Hi every one > > My understanding is that one uses the amd64 for building a kernel for > systems with Intel Quad Core processors. > > It is helpful when naming conventions follow a logical strand. I mean > why does freebsd use a single manufacturer's name to represent a > genre? The time to complain about that was when they put the "i" in i386. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core
Hi, On 06 August 2009 pm 19:07:12 Erik Trulsson wrote: > On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 05:18:09PM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote: > > On 06 August 2009 pm 16:40:41 Mark Stapper wrote: > > > Erich Dollansky wrote: > > > > IA 64? Wans't this once - or still is - the term used for > > > > the Itanium? > > > > > > The one that didn't stick... indeed. > > > > do they really sell machines with this CPU in numbers? > > Wikipedia article on Itanium, Intel manufactures around 200,000 even for a 'RISC' CPU, this number seems very low to me. > > I have not seen one in the wild. > > Not surprising since the Itanium is mainly used in the kind of > high-end server systems that us ordinary people rarely see and > certainly can't afford to buy. I see Sun and IBM machines in places where the Itanium should fit. Some moved away from HP to avoid the Itanium. I know, USD 1 000 000 or more is not what normal people pay for a small computer. Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core
> On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 14:14:49 +0100 > > David Southwell wrote: > > Hi every one > > > > My understanding is that one uses the amd64 for building a kernel for > > systems with Intel Quad Core processors. > > > > It is helpful when naming conventions follow a logical strand. I mean > > why does freebsd use a single manufacturer's name to represent a > > genre? > > The time to complain about that was when they put the "i" in i386. Yep I tried to email intel to tell them using uucp on my unix system from a Sirius on an 8086 but intel were not on email at the time!!! David ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
