Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

E2K Press Conference 2/25/99: Linux Kernel 2.0 boots 52

Posted by sengan from the cool-it-works-with-Linux dept.
Yuri Kiryanov writes "Elbrus, the maker of the E2K processor, has released details from their recent Press Conference. The highlights are that they have a Native Linux Kernel 2.0.34 running on a multilevel simulation model (including Verilog level RTL). Their native compiler achieves 8.5 FPU instructions per cycle. The E2K has SMP Built-in, should have Merced compatibility and only loses 20-30% speed when compiling foreign instruction sets with respect to the E2K's native performance." Note: the site is pretty slow so be patient. It's now in English and will soon post more E2K info.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

E2K Press Conference 2/25/99: Linux Kernel 2.0 boots More

E2K Press Conference 2/25/99: Linux Kernel 2.0 boots

Comments Filter:
  • If I remember correctly, the earlier Linux kernels did have SMP, it was just horrendously inefficient. I only have one processor though so I wouldn't know. ;)

    Daniel
  • First of all, they don't have to release source unless they distribute binary software. They haven't broken any licences yet, as far as I can tell.

    Secondly, I very much doubt you'll get anything terribly exciting out of the patches they've applied to Linux -- most of the kernel is really pretty portable these days, the main bits which aren't are all hardware-related, and a lot of these can just be ditched when you're running on a simulator.

    Of course, I'm sure a lot of people would like to take a peek at the compiler. Not least Intel and everyone else who's struggling to write a decent compiler for Merced. I suspect they'll be keeping the important parts of that under their hats though, at least for the time being.


  • 1. The reason they can't manufacture it and demo it is because they don't have a fab, and they don't have money to contract with an existing fab. Insisting that they have it in silicon is simply not realistic.

    2. They have several Verilog descriptions. One of them is extremely high level, logicly. One is relatively midlevel, and one is RTL, as in Register Transfer Level, I believe. This means they're read to send it to the fab soon.

    3. I understand the anger at not being able to see it, but it might not be FUD. This isn't vaporware that no one ever intends to release, this a processor thats been sitting around for years because they can't afford to produce them, and they've had years to work towards the goal of getting it to were it is now, not having 18 months to turn out a product that just barely works, and isn't particularly good, but it works.


    Andrew Gardner
  • Silly Poster!
    Don't You know what EPIC is?

    (obviously stated to the tune of that famous Trix line, AND I know it's not completely accurate but hell, HAD to say it!)






  • > I may be wrong here, but I really thought that SMP support for the linux kernel was only available in the 2.1.x and the 2.2.x series of the kernel.

    You are wrong :-) SMP has existed since 1.3.somethingorother, I think. It does exist in 2.0.x, but is implemented in a fairly inefficient way. The 2.1.x/2.2.x SMP is a much better, more scalable implementation.

    Eric
  • I just love how they can bench non-existant cpu's. If Intel and AMD could do this to create FUD about each other, don't you think they would have done it? I personally take everything that doesn't even have a prototype with a brick of salt (because the grain doesn't do the job for this).
  • i don't know where I was going with that one.
  • It makes perfect sense. You can have RTL and even transistor level layouts for a great architecture after spending a few million dollars (less if all your employees are Russian), but to manufacture it you need a modern fab, which costs many billions of dollars. Not everyone has access to that kind of capital, and that is no reflection on their skills as designers.
  • Since when are there export restrictions on CPUs ?

  • I can make a software simulation of a 256-bit processor running at a simulated 1.2 terahertz, does us no good though, does it? MAKE the god damn thing, THEN post the public affairs fluff.

    I'd be amazed if you could. They have an RTL level description of the CPU in Verilog. Thats the lowest level description that can be produced by hand, and specifies the datapaths and the degree of parallelism precisely. This is then fed into a synthesis/place/route flow to produce the GDSII that is sent to the fab. That process in largely automatic, although complex designs like CPUs require some manual intervention, and it can take a few hundred man years (six months or so for a CPU design team) to complete.

    You may be able to write a high level C simulation of CPU at 1.2THz, but RTL Verilog is a whole different matter.

  • Simply, they probably;

    a) feel that an established Western brand would give them better brand recognition in most markets;

    b) don't have, and due to the parlous state of the Russian economy cannot afford to build, modern fabrication plants of the necessary level of technology (it being a reasonable assumption that we're talking sub 0.25 micron tracks here), in order to produce such a processor themselves.

    I feel either or both factors have to be in play here.
  • Completely true.. Still though, the fact that they've run Linux on it is a bonus for us (us being the Linux geekies out there).. I really would like to see more serious specs on this thing, and if they DO intend to ever build it (or if anyone intends to ever build it) what the plans are for an accompanying chipset? A processor alone doesn't make a system, and if it's all that fast the chipset and memory interface (and perhaps even memory?) to go with it will need to be created too..

    Jim
  • This stuff actually hurts these guys (if they are serious and not a big hoax). I'll have fun and critisize some of this:

    Their native compiler achieves 8.5 FPU instructions per cycle

    On what code!? It's elementary on some codes and all but impossible on other... This statement in and of itself is only FUDish, and damaging if they really have a product.

    The E2K has SMP Built-in

    And 'built in SMP' means what?? Cache coherence? Two cores in the same chip?

    should have Merced compatibility and only loses 20-30% speed when compiling foreign instruction sets with respect to the E2K's native performance.

    As very little is actually known about Merced, this is more than a little silly...


    And re: the SPEC numbers.. Please DO show me the memory interface for those numbers..

    Finally, these guys have AFAIK never designed a single chip CPU.. Oh, they've done some really fast systems considering their limitations in process technology, but there are some differences between thousands-of-chips CPUs and single chip ones..

    I'm certain a lot of nice people will correct me where I'm wrong ;-)

    Again: This kind of publicity could be damaging to them if they really have a product. Lots of people will start to think they're just like me: hot air speakers


    Has it ever occurred to you that God might be a committee?
  • It's been availible since 1.3.something. SMP is why Linus upped the major version. The misinformation probably comes from the fact that SMP is much better in 2.1/2.2


    Has it ever occurred to you that God might be a committee?
  • At once as in two cores or at once as in switches on L1 cache miss?
    Has it ever occurred to you that God might be a committee?
  • The processor has 'backing registers' and keeps one thread 'sleeping' there. When the running thread wants to access data not in L1 cache the CPU does:

    1. Starts to fetch data.

    2. Switches to other (sleeping) thread.

    Ok?

    Like TERAs stuff and the latest PowerPC AS.


    Has it ever occurred to you that God might be a committee?
  • Which single-chip CPUs have they made? All claims I've read have been about multi (100s or 1000s) chip CPUs.


    Has it ever occurred to you that God might be a committee?
  • When it costs over a $Billion to build a modern fab, don't you figure only the biggest chipmakers can actually afford to run their own?
  • Q: Have you already worked with OSs supporting multiprocessing?
    A: We have compiled Kernel OS Linux 2.0.34 using Elbrus compiler and executed on the machine simulator.

    I may be wrong here, but I really thought that SMP support for the linux kernel was only available in the 2.1.x and the 2.2.x series of the kernel. Is it just that they run the non-SMP kernel on an SMP simulation???
  • No, SMP was available in the 2.0.x kernels. It just didn't work nearly as well (could lock up the system/worse performance).
  • I know you guys are in San Jose and busy, but I've submitted this article twice, once on Saturday, and once on Sunday. What's taken so long for it to be posted?
  • not to start anything really, but a friend of mine heard that IBM had purchased something from a russian company, like chip wise... as of right now i don't know much more, but that what the buzz was...

Slashdot Top Deals

"What man has done, man can aspire to do." -- Jerry Pournelle, about space flight

Close