[GTALUG] How to go fast without speculating... maybe
davec-b at rogers.com
Mon Jan 29 21:56:41 EST 2018
On 29/01/18 09:17 PM, Alvin Starr via talk wrote:
> A number of groups have tried to develop extremely parallel processors
> but all seem to have gained little traction.
> There was the XPU 128, the Epiphany(http://www.adapteva.com/) and more
> recently the Xenon Phi and AMD Epyc.
> At one point I remember reading a article about sun developing an
> asynchronous CPU which would be interesting.
Many experiments of that era fell flat, as did the attempt at at an
> All these processors run into the same set of problems.
> 1) x86 silicon is amazingly cheap.
> 2) supporting multiple CPUs cause more software support for each
> new CPU architecture.
> 3) very little software is capable of truly taking advantage of
> many parallel threads without really funky compilers and software
> design tools.
> 4) having designed a fancy CPU most companies try very hard to
> keep their proprietary knowledge all within their own control where
> the x86 instruction set must be just about open source now days.
> 5) getting motherboard manufacturers to take a chance on a new CPU
> is not an easy thing.
> My benchmark for processor success is: Does several of
> Asus,Supermicro,Tyan,Gigabyte et al make a motherboard for this CPU.
> Even people with deep pockets like DEC with their Alpha CPU and IBM
> with their Power CPUs have not been able to make a significant inroad
> into the commodity server world.
> Mips has had some luck with low to mid range systems for routers and
> storage systems but their server business is long gone with the death
> of SGI.
> Sun/Oracle has had some luck with the Sparc but not all that much
> outside their own use and I am just speculating but I would bet that
> Sun/Oracle sells more x86 systems than Sparc systems.
All those companies, plus H-P, hit critical mass: people ported their
software to them. Without that, you're
stuck with x86 supersets. And if you don't keep succeeding, customers
defect to the competition.
Oracle fell off the table a few years back, recognized it and laid off
their Solaris team. Their present is x86 and Fujitsu SPARC, and their
future is purpose-built x86 with hyperchannel.
> ARM seems to be having some luck but I believe that luck is because of
> their popularity in the small computer systems world sliding into
> supporting larger systems and not by being designed for servers from
> the get go.
> I am a bit of a processor geek and have put lots of effort in the past
> into elegant processors that just seem to go nowhere.
> I would love to see some technologies other than the current von
> Neumann somewhat parallel SMP but I have a sad feeling that that will
> be a long time coming.
> With the latest screw-up from Intel and the huge exploit surface that
> is the Intel ME someone may be able to get some traction by coming up
> with a processor that is designed and verified for security.
Compilers folks have given up on software-only magic: the T1/T5 showed
that hardware could contribute greatly, and I suspect hardware-software
co-design may be the next thing we see. A more secure non-speculative
processor might suffice, but I don't know if it will be based on SPARC,
POWER or something resembling an x86 microcode will be most attractive
to the market.
I do know it will run Linux.
> On 01/29/2018 05:36 PM, David Collier-Brown via talk wrote:
>> Kunle Olukotun didn't like systems that wasted their time stalled on
>> loads and branches. He and his team at Afara Websystems therefor
>> designed a non-speculating processor that did work without waits. It
>> became the Sun T1.
David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify
System Programmer and Author | some people and astonish the rest
davecb at spamcop.net | -- Mark Twain
More information about the talk