Michael C . Wu wrote:
You've just ruined any real reason for me to continue my education
as a computer architecture student :P
Let all the computer scientists design the CPU and hope that
they take into account the electromagnetic effects!!
Er, turn this around to: design the
Michael C . Wu wrote:
I have been hearing about GaAs since the beginning of my college
career. One chemistry professor put it rather well, Gallium
Arsenide based semiconductors are considered the future of
semiconductors, and always will be the future of semiconductors.
Hitachi has a GaAs
Jeremiah Gowdy wrote:
Now think about this. Microsoft Visual C++ will be *the*
industry compiler for Itainium. Their compiler is already
working and has ILP support. Plus Intel makes its own
compiler which plugs into Visual Studio. Both the Microsoft
and Intel compilers for ILP are going
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Terry Lambert writes:
Michael C . Wu wrote:
I have been hearing about GaAs since the beginning of my college
career. One chemistry professor put it rather well, Gallium
Arsenide based semiconductors are considered the future of
semiconductors, and always will be
On 26 Apr, Michael C . Wu wrote:
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:24:18PM +0200, Remy Nonnenmacher scribbled:
| On 17 Apr, Andrew Hesford wrote:
| On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 12:49:04PM -0700, Jeremiah Gowdy wrote:
| For sure. Look at how it's pretty more easy to use an ARM or MIPS core
| to handle
On 26 Apr, Andrew Hesford wrote:
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 06:08:36PM -0500, Michael C . Wu wrote:
| and a bunch of ARMs for low-level I/O tasks. Back to imagination. (Take
| a look at 0.15um copper process FPGAs with embeded ARM at Altera, for
| example, and you will see why no one, in the
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 08:08:48PM -0700, Jeremiah Gowdy wrote:
What's KA-64 ?
AMD internal name for the x86-64.
--
-- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 07:23:52PM -0500, Andrew Hesford scribbled:
| On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 06:08:36PM -0500, Michael C . Wu wrote:
| The future isn't FPGAs; it's GaAs BJT circuitry, designed and built by
| the guys who have money to set up a fab and roll out millions of chips.
| It will be a
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 06:51:27PM -0700, David O'Brien scribbled:
| On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 05:59:06PM -0500, Michael C . Wu wrote:
| IIRC, KA-64 does not even have an emulator yet.
|
| Are you making a distinction between emulator and simulator? Such that
| SimNow! and VirtuHammer don't fall
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 10:09:32PM -0400, Sergey Babkin scribbled:
| Michael C . Wu wrote:
|
| With the branch prediction, cache tracing, and EPIC instructions,
| you really want to use an ILP compiler. Without a compiler that
| can decide on good ways to output binaries that run with all
On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 01:10:21PM +0200, Remy Nonnenmacher scribbled:
| On 26 Apr, Michael C . Wu wrote:
| On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:24:18PM +0200, Remy Nonnenmacher scribbled:
| | On 17 Apr, Andrew Hesford wrote:
| | On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 12:49:04PM -0700, Jeremiah Gowdy wrote:
| I do
- Original Message -
From: David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jeremiah Gowdy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Michael C . Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 5:08 AM
Subject: Re: x86-64 Hammer and IA64 Itainium
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 08:08:48PM -0700, Jeremiah
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 12:49:04PM -0700, Jeremiah Gowdy scribbled:
| I'd like to know if anyone's considering support for the new AMD
| Sledgehammer/Clawhammer/*hammer with x86-64 architecture. I know the new
| hammer cpus will run as _very_ fast x86-32 processors, and FreeBSD would run
|
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:24:18PM +0200, Remy Nonnenmacher scribbled:
| On 17 Apr, Andrew Hesford wrote:
| On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 12:49:04PM -0700, Jeremiah Gowdy wrote:
| For sure. Look at how it's pretty more easy to use an ARM or MIPS core
| to handle gluelessly the PCI, SDRAM, Flash etc...
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 06:08:36PM -0500, Michael C . Wu wrote:
| and a bunch of ARMs for low-level I/O tasks. Back to imagination. (Take
| a look at 0.15um copper process FPGAs with embeded ARM at Altera, for
| example, and you will see why no one, in the futur, will never ever need
| a
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 05:59:06PM -0500, Michael C . Wu wrote:
IIRC, KA-64 does not even have an emulator yet.
Are you making a distinction between emulator and simulator? Such that
SimNow! and VirtuHammer don't fall into what you are speaking of?
--
-- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
To
Michael C . Wu wrote:
With the branch prediction, cache tracing, and EPIC instructions,
you really want to use an ILP compiler. Without a compiler that
can decide on good ways to output binaries that run with all the IA-64
innovations^Wreinvention-of-the-wheels.
Anothing interesting point
IIRC, KA-64 does not even have an emulator yet. Rest assured that
there will be a lot of people in and out of this project interested
in supporting a KA-64 port of FreeBSD.
What's KA-64 ?
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the
- Original Message -
From: Sergey Babkin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Michael C . Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Jeremiah Gowdy [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 4:09 AM
Subject: Re: x86-64 Hammer and IA64 Itainium
Anothing interesting point is that the optimisation
On Fri, 20 Apr 2001, David O'Brien wrote:
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 12:51:17PM -0700, Doug White wrote:
(Yes I know the emulator is ass-slow and a gigantic beast, but it does
work, right?)
The public simulator took 12 hours to get to the twirler of our boot
loader. I guess it would have
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 03:57:37PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would like to see this too, however I think you have to sign NDA's and
the like to be a part of the AMD effort to develop for it. Understandable
I guess.
Yes. I now have a copy of the Virtutech Simics x86-64 simulator.
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 02:06:56PM -0700, Jeremiah Gowdy wrote:
I'm talking about FreeBSD using the gcc x86-64 compiler to port
FreeBSD to x86-64.
What other compiler would we use?? I have access to the SuSE x96-64
compiler effort.
I'm talking about a FreeBSD project to port to x86-64.
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 12:51:17PM -0700, Doug White wrote:
(Yes I know the emulator is ass-slow and a gigantic beast, but it does
work, right?)
The public simulator took 12 hours to get to the twirler of our boot
loader. I guess it would have booted the i386 kernel I was feeding it in
just
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 08:32:32AM -0700, Jeremiah Gowdy wrote:
You're taking me out of context my friend. I was responding to this:
...
I was saying that gcc can be used by anyone without signing any NDAs.
Ah. Sorry for the misudertanding. You are of course correct.
--
-- David ([EMAIL
Second, it is this difference from x86 that I think is justification
enough to focus on Itanium rather than x86-64.
I'm not sure exactly how
x86-64 works, but it seems to me that it's simply the standard x86
architecture expanded to 64 bits.
With several enchancements, yes.
Isn't time we
I think a port to x86-64 is an excellent idea, but I also think that
you're worrying about it too far in advance. As you say, the x86-64
project is working on getting gcc ported, which is important chunk of
work. As such, it's probably best to not worry about a FreeBSD port
until after
Isn't time we kill the x86? It's been around too long. I'm not sure how
the Itanium looks, and I'm no Intel freak, but a change would be nice.
We should begin moving in the direction of RISC (or at least VLIW).
There's a reason every other processor has a radically different
On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Jeremiah Gowdy wrote:
I'm not talking about joining the x86-64 project, otherwise I'd be mailing
them. I'm talking about FreeBSD using the gcc x86-64 compiler to port
FreeBSD to x86-64. I have a copy of the AMD x86-64 spec, mailed to me by
AMD (also available on their
Mike Silbersack writes:
Once that's done, it'll probably be a matter to send a clawhammer
system and a large box of cheese and crackers to the guys who did the
freebsd alpha port. If the architecture is actually so similar to x86,
it should only take them a few weekends. :)
As one
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
Mike Silbersack writes:
Once that's done, it'll probably be a matter to send a clawhammer
system and a large box of cheese and crackers to the guys who did the
freebsd alpha port. If the architecture is actually so similar to x86,
it
On 17 Apr, Andrew Hesford wrote:
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 12:49:04PM -0700, Jeremiah Gowdy wrote:
I would love to see FreeBSD running natively (64bit) under the x86-64
architecture, and unlike the Itainium, it's differences with x86-32
seem to be few (of course).
Porting FreeBSD to
AlohA!
Jeremiah Gowdy wrote:
Linux/GNU people in association with AMD have already begun work on x86-64
versions of gcc and binutils. If Linux ports first, which in my opinion
they probably will since they are working on it actively, FreeBSD can only
gain from the work already done by the
On 18-Apr-01 Andrew Gallatin wrote:
Mike Silbersack writes:
Once that's done, it'll probably be a matter to send a clawhammer
system and a large box of cheese and crackers to the guys who did the
freebsd alpha port. If the architecture is actually so similar to x86,
it should
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, John Baldwin wrote:
Also, in case you aren't aware (this is not to you Drew, I know you know :))
FreeBSD already has an ia64 port underway in -current. ia64, x86-64, ppc,
and a few others are on the radar scope of the FreeBSD developers.
And at one point, the Project
On 18-Apr-01 Doug White wrote:
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, John Baldwin wrote:
Also, in case you aren't aware (this is not to you Drew, I know you know :))
FreeBSD already has an ia64 port underway in -current. ia64, x86-64, ppc,
and a few others are on the radar scope of the FreeBSD developers.
BTW, is there any AMD SMP machine already running FreeBSD ? (my BP6 is
getting old and tired, and I'd like to keep an SMP machine)
--
Thierry Herbelot
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
On 18-Apr-01 Thierry Herbelot wrote:
BTW, is there any AMD SMP machine already running FreeBSD ? (my BP6 is
getting old and tired, and I'd like to keep an SMP machine)
Not that I'm aware of. I would love to get my hands on a dual Athlon to get it
working if I could get docs and/or a machine
Once that's done, it'll probably be a matter to send a clawhammer
system and a large box of cheese and crackers to the guys who did the
freebsd alpha port. If the architecture is actually so similar to
x86,
it should only take them a few weekends. :)
As one of the
I'd like to know if anyone's considering support for the new AMD
Sledgehammer/Clawhammer/*hammer with x86-64 architecture. I know the new
hammer cpus will run as _very_ fast x86-32 processors, and FreeBSD would run
happily under that, however, the x86-64 architecture offers major advantages
over
I would like to see this too, however I think you have to sign NDA's and
the like to be a part of the AMD effort to develop for it. Understandable
I guess. Also they only seem interested in boosting Linux adoption of the
new AMD 64 bit procs. *shrug*
I would like to see this too, however I think you have to sign NDA's and
the like to be a part of the AMD effort to develop for it. Understandable
I guess. Also they only seem interested in boosting Linux adoption of the
new AMD 64 bit procs. *shrug*
I'm not talking about joining the x86-64
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 12:49:04PM -0700, Jeremiah Gowdy wrote:
I would love to see FreeBSD running natively (64bit) under the x86-64
architecture, and unlike the Itainium, it's differences with x86-32
seem to be few (of course).
Porting FreeBSD to Itainium would/will/could be a much much
42 matches
Mail list logo
