×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Linus: Praying for Hammer to Win

chrisd posted more than 11 years ago | from the thems-fighting-words dept.

Linux 487

An anonymous reader writes "The boys at Intel can't be happy with the latest opposition to the IA-64 instruction set. According to this Inquirer scoop, Linus himself has weighed in, and it appears he's putting his eggs in the x86-64 basket. In the original usenet post, he goes so far as to say that 'We're ... praying that AMD's x86-64 succeeds in the market, forcing Intel to make Yamhill their standard platform.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

487 comments

ftso.org #trolls (-1)

Sexual Asspussy (453406) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973403)

oh I just don't know where to begin
love just doesn't wait forever
it's now or never
but she keeps him hanging on
the silly cheering her on
she says she can't go home without a chaperon

CHORUS:
accidents will happen
they're only hit and run
you used to be a victim
now you're not the only one
accidents will happen
they're only hit and run
I don't want to hear it
'cause I know what I've done

there's so many fish in the sea
that only rise up in a sweat of smoke like mercury
but they keep you hanging on
they say you're so young
your mind is made up
but your mouth is undone

CHORUS

and it's the damage that we do
you'll never know
it's the words that we don't say
that scare me so
there are so many people to see
so many people you can check upon
and add to your collection
but they keep you hanging on
until you're well hung
your mouth is made up
but your mind is undone

CHORUS

When will you lam0rz learn that Linus is a fagg0t? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973528)

That's 2 fps in a row, eh? Kudos.

nice (0, Offtopic)

sethadam1 (530629) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973406)

It would be nice if good hardware was actually adopted into the mainstream, but Mac and Sun are living proof that people want CHEAP hardware. Let's all pray this is a good median.

Re:nice (-1, Offtopic)

Aktalmukanandros (443833) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973429)

Could you be bothered to export some cheap Mac hardware from your alternate reality?

Re:nice (1)

bcrowell (177657) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973467)

I think he meant that Apple and Sun aren't doing well, and it's becuse their hardware is better but more expensive.

Re:nice (2, Insightful)

be-fan (61476) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973597)

Apple ... hardware is better
>>>>>>>>>>
Umm, Apple's hardware sucks. Most macs have a slow processor talking over a slow bus to slow RAM. Most of them also have slow graphics, using GeForce-4 MXs where comparable (pecking order not price) PCs would use GeForce 4 4200s. Apples integration and build quality might be great, but not its hardware.

Re:nice (1)

Anonymous Canard (594978) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973445)

It would be nice if good hardware was actually adopted into the mainstream, but Mac and Sun are living proof that people want CHEAP hardware. Let's all pray this is a good median.

In this case I think you get your wish. EPIC hasn't been proved to be any less expensive to manufacture than x86, and developing an optimizing compiler for x86 is considerably more expensive. So in this case CHEAP and GOOD are living in the same tent.

Re:This is FUD (5, Insightful)

JPriest (547211) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973577)

This is _exactly_ what Linus said

We're a lot more likely to make PAGE_SIZE bigger, and generally praying that AMD's x86-64 succeeds in the market, forcing Intel to make Yamhill their standard platform. At which point we _could_ make things truly 64 bits

He wants hammer to succeed only so Intel will have to go 64 bit and they can go all out 64 bit, this is not Linus picking the AMD camp.
usernet post here [google.com]

Re:This is FUD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973611)

mod this up!! article is wrong, please update.

forst (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973407)

porst

i'm sorry

First Post!!! (-1, Offtopic)

The_Shadows (255371) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973409)

I win!!!! Wooo hooo!!! Wang! [penny-arcade.com]

Forgot to AC (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973419)

I too have a +1 posting bonus, which I protect by posting AC when I claim first post.

Maybe some day you will be as smart as me.

Cherish my balls as though they were unharmed miners.

Hooray! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973417)

Hooray for Linus. Those penguins do have balls.

One endorsement down, one to go (4, Funny)

sgtsanity (568914) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973420)

Now if AMD can get the endorsement of "The Carmack", they will really be happy.

Re:One endorsement down, one to go (4, Funny)

CaffeineAddict2001 (518485) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973511)

Carmack and Linus look very similar. I think they are actually the same person living a double life. He may fool you with that phoney norwegian accent, but I know the truth.

Re:One endorsement down, one to go (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973540)

Other than Slashdotters and gamers, who (ie the general public) actually knows who Carmack is?

Re:One endorsement down, one to go (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973559)

Who actually knows who Linus is in the general public? The point is moot. Carmack drives the 3D market as Linus is starting to drive the x86 general hardware/CPU market. When Carmack speaks, you better be damn sure nVidia and ATI are listening. Otherwise you will be the next 3Dfx.

Momentum (2, Funny)

crumbz (41803) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973421)

To me this is an impressive endorsement. Given the overall support that AMD has given Linux over the years, it is great to see a little bit of that given back.

Cool. x86 through 2086!

Re:Momentum (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973431)

Ok, fine but I have a more important question that needs to be answered.

It's about a girl - the only girl I've ever loved. We'd been together for about two years. And as far as I knew, we loved each other.

About four months ago we broke up. She was cheating on me with a complete bastard who was cheating on his girlfriend too. It really messed my head up - I've been depressed for months and to add insult to injury, she won't even talk to me anymore.

It's like I've been cast as the bad guy whereas the complete bastard gets all the glory.

Ok. But .. the problem is, I just can't seem to stop 'cyber-stalking' my ex-girlfriend. I knew her password, so I forwarded all her emails to an anonymous Lycos account, and periodically I'll log in to her mail server and grab her Outbox for reading.

Every time I read the emails I get really really upset. But I can't tell anyone why, because then I'd have to admit to stalking her.

It's addictive. I can't seem to stop doing it.

Has anyone else been in a situation like this? What did you do to resolve it?

This isn't a troll. I'm genuine, and I need help. Please, please .. help.

Re:Momentum (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973510)

.m.u.r.d.e.r..s.u.i.c.i.d.e.

Re:Momentum (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973621)

In trying emotional times like these, there is only one place to turn to...NWA lyrics.

The founders of west coast gangsta rap teach us important life lessons like "a bitch is a bitch" and "life ain't nuthin but bitches and money".

You also noted that the guy that was boning your woman was also cheating on his girlfriend. Find that girl! You can buy her a drink and empathize with her because you too have been cheated on. With that kind of sensitivity, you should be pulling her panties off within hours.

Good luck, psycho boy.

Re:Momentum (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Canard (594978) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973537)

To me this is an impressive endorsement. Given the overall support that AMD has given Linux over the years, it is great to see a little bit of that given back.

What endorsement is that? AMD has been utterly piggish with respect to open source. GCC still produces awful optimizations when targeting any AMD chip, and in fact has gotten worse between 2.9x and 3.x. Intel started out contributing pgcc when Linux was still in its infancy, and code output for Pentiums has gotten successively better. When bad optimization can halve your effective computation rate, that I think speaks volumes.

That said, I have to agree with Linus on this one. Itanium would be a disaster for free compilers, as heavily encumbered as it is by compiler technology patents. And when it comes down to it, I'm not all that certain I want my general purpose language compiler generating what is effectively microcode anyway.

IMHO of course.

Question (-1, Offtopic)

ziggy_zero (462010) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973425)

Hey, does anyone know when the 64-bit version of Windows XP will be available to the public? I heard it exists, and I'd like to put it on my CAD machine (planning on dual Hammers) once I build it next year - along with a 64-bit Linux distro, of course.

Re:Question (-1, Offtopic)

unixmaster (573907) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973455)

I had Win XP Beta Tester login for two months and they give 64-bit betas for 9-10 months . I am not sure whats the latest beta build because my login is expired . Well dont share your login with 10 people even microsoft is not that dumb :/ .

The problem with Hammer. (2, Interesting)

Kenja (541830) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973426)

is the same as the problem with OS/2. People dont want to re-write their applications for native support. I expect very few apps to be codeed for Hammer because its 32bit compatiblity is so good. An application devloper can write for old 32bit x86 and target Hammer and x86 at the same time. Just like devloeprs could once write applications for Windows 3.1 and have them run on Windows and OS/2. Not that the CPU wont do well, but I dont expect it to ever get the kind of support it wants.

Re:The problem with Hammer. (3, Funny)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973469)

Yeah, that whole 16 bit to 32 bit transistion never happened either. People just didn't want to update their code.

Re:The problem with Hammer. (1)

tjansen (2845) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973474)

Yup. Most apps dont need a 64-bit address space, so why should anyone bother and provide two versions of the software (32&64 bit)?
But operating systems will support 64-bit, because some customers need 64 bit support, and usually those who are willing to pay a lot for it. And databases will, of course, support 64 bit because they need it as well.

Re:The problem with Hammer. (1)

rmadmin (532701) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973502)

Except for the fact that the industry will _eventually_ push everyone into 64 bit processors. Look at the 286 to 386 transfer. Given that 32 bit programs going to run on the 64 bit processors makes it alot easier for the conversion. Sun currently supports both. When you buy the Sol 8/9 (Example) media kits, you can install on either 32 bit or 64 bit sparc boxen. The industry is going to have to do something like this. Of course I know their are more specifics behind what Sun does, but you get the picture.

Re:The problem with Hammer. (1)

greed (112493) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973591)

When you buy the Sol 8/9 (Example) media kits, you can install on either 32 bit or 64 bit sparc boxen.

It's even better than that. When you install on a 64-bit SPARC (or AIX on a 64-bit POWER or PowerPC), you can still run 32-bit code fully natively. No emulation.

You have to craft your OS carefully to allow 32- and 64-bit applications to co-exist on the system. But you usually have a kernel that runs in one mode and the appropriate userland code to call into it from either.

The easiest way to get started, of course, is to have a 32-bit kernel support 64-bit user tasks. Depending on the architecture, there may not be any advantage to re-building the kernel in 64-bit native. ("modprobe 64bit" anyone? AIX has the equivelent to turn on 64-bit user processes in a 32-bit kernel.)

Of course, the SPARC and PowerPCs have been doing this for... uh... how many years now? 6 at least, right? Intel going to a "pure" 64-bit architecture seemed to me to be just plain arrogant. "Forget your old code, buy our new 100-watt CPUs!"

Re:The problem with Hammer. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973543)

The difference here is there is now a big player in the os market that can offer quick support. The day hammer comes out I can buy it and re-emerge my gentoo system. Bang, those extra registers are being used.

Re:The problem with Hammer. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973548)

Yeah, which is why almost all Macinstosh applications are compiled for 68k and emulated by the PPC...

Re:The problem with Hammer. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973550)

You REALLY don't know what you are talking about. Porting to a new CPU architecture doesn't require rewriting to new API's, it requires fixing small areas of unportable source code. There's no comparison at all.

Re:The problem with Hammer. (2)

iabervon (1971) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973555)

But there are relatively few changes which need to be made to make a program run in 64-bit, and those changes don't cause problems with running it 32-bit. So people have the choice of their code running more slowly, but working everywhere, or running more quickly on Hammer, and running everywhere. Unlike with OS/2, you're not making two different versions for the different platforms, at the source level at least.

Of course, you're going to have to have Hammer-specific binaries to use 64-bit. But generating them is just a compiler issue, and software comes out for different processors all the time, when it doesn't require code changes.

Re:The problem with Hammer. (2)

dpilot (134227) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973600)

But it's an even bigger problem with IA-64. At least Hammer will do a good job of running IA-32 code, which IA-64 doesn't. All Hammer needs is a 64-bit OS that can load both X86-64 and IA-32 code, and it's off and running. For that matter, all it really needs is to be available, because it'll simply look like a faster Athlon with no other changes.

There's a horse-race happening, because IA-64 is here and X86-64 isn't. But IA-64 is currently stuck squarely in the high-end server market where HP and Sun live. The real horserace is between price drops on IA-64 and announcement, availability, and uptake on X86-64. X86-64 is a natural for the workstation market, but it's got to get there and move into an unfamiliar setting dominated by boxmakers more familiar with Intel than AMD before IA-64 prices drop enough to make it viable, there.

what a trashy article (5, Insightful)

krog (25663) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973428)

it's an internet tabloid creating a mountain ("Linus himself is praying that AMD wins!") from a molehill (half a sentence in an unrelated USENET post).

crap story.

Re:what a trashy article (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973453)

Agreed, the Inquirer story was every bit as bad as your average Enquirer piece. Bitch bitch bitch Slashdot editorial quality control moan moan moan.

Re:what a trashy article (-1, Flamebait)

Rupert (28001) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973500)

Poorly written, too. It felt like whoever wrote it was not a native speaker of the English language.

Re:what a trashy article (1)

DetrimentalFiend (233753) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973603)

I guess I'm not the only one who thought that the article kind of blew this out of proportion. Sure it is a great endorsement, but it's not like he made a special post just about how much he loves the hammer. I suppose it is a big deal for all parties involved, but I was expecting more after reading the slashdot headline.

Not surprising... (4, Insightful)

tjansen (2845) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973433)

Not surprising... he works for Transmeta, and they licensed x86-64... So what else should he say?
Beside that, who cares for the CPU's instruction set? Nobody, except compiler designers and very few assembler programmers. And they already know x86 and the tools exist. So the only argument for Itanium can be performance/price. And ATM it looks like Opterons will be cheaper.

Re:Not surprising... (1)

WetCat (558132) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973586)

I tried to transfer custom-made system from Linux/RedHat on Sun SparcStation to Linux/RedHat on x86. The one and only problem was with endianness. (BIG ENDIAN versus LITTLE ENDIAN).

Re:Not surprising... (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973606)

Beside that, who cares for the CPU's instruction set? Nobody, except compiler designers and very few assembler programmers.

Umm, you are correct, but you have to keep in mind that Linus Torvalds is in that set of very few people. He may not be the one writing the compiler himself, but he is extremely close to the compiler-- he works on the operating system kernel, the one position that has to be most sensitive to obscure conditions of the microprocessor in order to optimise. Which is why he is weighing in on this subject.

Anyway, most of us have heard of Torvalds' fondness of hand-writable assembly language. (I.e., the huge portions of early Linux that were written in x86 assembly and C code which is written in such a way it may as well be assembly.. I had heard things indicating he had mostly grown out of that lately, though, now that non-x86 platforms are closer to his chunk of the kernel tree.. is that the case?) And i think we are all well aware of Linux's famed nonportability to non-GCC compilers due to dependence on obscure GCC bugs and nonstandard features. So, yeah. Linus may not be The Compiler Guy, but he will definitely have to be talking to the Compiler Guys on a regular basis, and he is in the group of people (the linux kernel development team) most likely to be the first ones to run into trouble with any new bugs which crop up in gcc. So he definitely has a good reason to have an opinion on this subject, especially given the subject increases compiler complexity so much that it is somewhat likely to increase the number of small compiler bugs that make no difference to you or i but huge amounts of difference to those persons who know what "spinlocks" are..

- super ugly ultraman

Just wishing... (3, Insightful)

Chexum (1498) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973434)

I see only Linus daydreaming about keeping x86 (the well-known and optimized standard bytecode at Transmeta, remember?), so that the 64 bit extensions get more widespread, thus "rest of us" can afford to get 64 bit architectures on this very same architecture we grown up with... On the other hand, it's a good goal :)

Re:Just wishing... (3, Insightful)

gmack (197796) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973601)

I think hes dreaming about 64 bit for the masses.
As would anyone else who has had to get 32 bit x86 to handle more than 4 gig of ram or tried and figgure out how to juggle the few registers provicded as efficiantly as possible.

I for one am also wishing for cheap 64 bit.

This is a bit ironic.. (5, Interesting)

Marx_Mrvelous (532372) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973438)

Considering that Linus is almost fanatical about needing to "break" backwards compatibility in the Linux kernel in order to develop it as fast as possible.

Now he's supporting a CPU scheme that, well, doesn't break anything and may even sacrifice performance for that compatibility.

Re:This is a bit ironic.. (1)

vox_gabrieli (250873) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973478)

The difference is the kernel upgrade doesn't cost any money, whereas the processor upgrade does. Breaking the kernel compatibility is free (in theory), while breaking processor compatibility is going to cost development $$$.

Re:This is a bit ironic.. (1)

outlander78 (527836) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973507)

There's a difference between breaking backwards compatability in a free (as in beer) operating system, and breaking compatability in hardware which is in thousands of homes and businesses. You can choose to not upgrade Linux kernels (2.2 still runs fine, as I understand it) and get most software updates compiled for that platform. However, you can't rebuild your CPU to support a new version of Windows, Linux, your favourite office suite or anything else. That's a key difference.

Addendum (1)

Marx_Mrvelous (532372) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973526)

Hmm, after reading the actual usenet post again, he's not really making a bold statement. I still think it's a little ironic, but not in a hypocritical way. Just want that "on record" :)

Re:This is a bit ironic.. (5, Informative)

gmack (197796) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973556)

That is _only_ true for module interfaces. In the past hes been very picky about changes that break userspace.

Re:This is a bit ironic.. (4, Insightful)

Dominic_Mazzoni (125164) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973558)

Now he's supporting a CPU scheme that, well, doesn't break anything and may even sacrifice performance for that compatibility.

Except that it's quite likely that an Opteron will be faster than an Itanium for most real-world tasks. At the very least it looks like it will be comparable in speed, and cheaper. If the Itanium really was screamingly fast, that would be different.

what did the inquirer add? (2, Insightful)

sh!va (312105) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973443)

This isn't really going to add to my slashdot karma, but that article said nothing new over what linus mentions in his usenet post. Complete waste of a slashdotting IMO.

"Praying?" Hello? First Amendment? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973454)

You might want to change the title of this story to "Hoping for Hammer to Win." Who's praying? Ever heard of the separation of church and state? Jesus.

Atheists are the last group of people who are still acceptable to oppress.

He's the one that made the daemons... (2)

RyanFenton (230700) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973636)

...Thus, if we can conclude that he is praying to himself, it isn't a religious argument anymore. Thus, he'd absolved! :^)

Ryan Fenton

Mountain out of a molehill (5, Insightful)

Zooks! (56613) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973475)

It's amazing that somebody could make such a relatively long article from what amounts to one sentence in Linus's email!

Reading the Linus's email it seems that he wasn't endorsing one way or the other. He was just hoping x86-64 became dominant since it would stave off some issues related to how pages were handled.

Apparently, if things go the Itanium route then some page related things get more complicated but that's it.

Nothing to see here. Move along.

Linus's Prayer (3, Funny)

markatwork (132554) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973482)

Now I lay me down to sleep.... I pray Intel the IA-64 Instruction set to keep. But if Intel folds before I wake, I pray AMD picks up their stake (of the market).

(OK so the last part sucks, but still ....)

Re:Linus's Prayer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973519)

the LAST part....?

Re:Linus's Prayer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973617)

taht si teh ghey!!1 I wil uses my adm hammar mortharbored to hax0r yuor compact computar machien for sayign taht ghey crap!

JEFFK!!1

Re:Linus's Prayer (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973647)

If I had mod points I would knock your post down. You cannot mock Scripture.

Well what I think (1)

unixmaster (573907) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973484)

Well as far as many people run a P2/P3 on their boxes , when AMD Hammer comes out it would be nice for linux people ( us ) to embrace AMD Hammer and buy it. I mean what did Intel give back to Linux ? They didnt even mention it on supported processors. Whereas AMD shows its processor on 64 bit Linux. So I think AMD deserves more respect on the linux scene.

Re:Well what I think (1)

AdTropis (6690) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973578)

though i really can't say anything bad about the company, i must say that i will not be using AMD in the future. over the past couple of years i have had nothing but troubles with AMD-based products. the main problem (as you have already guessed) has been heat. even now i have an 1800+ (1.533GHz) processor running at 1.150GHz and it's still 140F. oh, and that's including an all-copper heatsink and 50CFM fan combo too.

this is really sad considering i would be 100% behind AMD if weren't for these problems. maybe if the Hammer shows better heat handling, i'll get one. for now, though, it's Intel...

hammer time (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973489)

please hammer, don't hurt 'em!

no AMD vs. Intel (5, Informative)

reverse flow reactor (316530) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973492)

Maybe I misinterpreted the original post, but I thought that this had more to do 64-bit vs. 32-bit (and the limitations of a 32-bit platform) than it has to do with AMD vs. Intel.

The kernel compiles on so many different architectures, but with most of them being 64-bit (PPC, sparc, MIPS...). However, i386 is the dominant architecture by sheer numbers. To maintain crosss-architecture compatibility, the code has to support the lowest quality architeture (i386). By pushing towards a 64-bit architecture, the limitations of 32-bit can be left behind (oh yeah, but the nasty issue of backwards compatibility).

Unless I just misinterpreted the post.

Linus is overlooking one major point (1, Informative)

Jack Wagner (444727) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973497)

Quotes Linux Torvalds: "- the page cache works with index/offset, and that should be your first priority, since the page cache is all that matters from a performance standpoint."

That's all well and good for litle Endian OS's, but since you are dealing with a static offset you have one extra instruction lookup for all big endian machines. Thus if you port Linux to Sparc or Alpha you not only see a performance degredation of O(logN) but you loose one register spot on the level II chache for the offest lookup. In other words it will be slower, much much slower.

Warmest regards,
-Jack

Re:Linus is overlooking one major point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973584)

no you don't

Irony (2)

jejones (115979) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973503)

How ironic...the architecture of Dorian Gray, with endless bags on the side added over the past two decades (a long time in computer years)--only made to run reasonably by internally interpreting it on the fly into something decent and executing the result...and technically knowledgeable people are praying that the latest flogging of the dead horse is successful? I know, I'm guilty of it, too, because I want Intel to lose, but how strange that Intel's doing something right, namely starting over, is so universally deprecated (vide the "Itanic" nickname common on websites like The Register).

Its just more proof (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973504)

To show its a myth that linux is a good choice if you want to run on X86 processors.

So what's next Coke of Pepsi? (4, Funny)

Wizri (518731) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973506)

Hey Linus,

What should I drink?

Thank alot,

Wizri,

Re:So what's next Coke of Pepsi? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973610)

Guinness.

#include

Re:So what's next Coke of Pepsi? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973620)

Tab... You're supposed to drink Tab.

Considering.. (0)

iONiUM (530420) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973513)

AMD has 32-bit backward compatability and intel's does not, I believe AMD is the better choice anyways. Who would not want to have that option?

Re:Considering.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973569)

Intel's 64-bit chip does have backwards compatibility. It's just very poor.

Re:Considering.. (2)

binaryDigit (557647) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973605)

AMD has 32-bit backward compatability and intel's does not

Sorry, wrong. The Itanic IS backwards compatible with 32bit x86 software. AAMOF, it's been beat up quite a bit about it's lackluster performance in this regard (though understandable from Intel's POV, since it's designed to replace the x86 ISA, not just be a faster x86 chip).

Linus is an a-hole (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973517)

If he has his way the linux kernel will require 4 gigs of hardrive space and will still be using instructions from the 386 cpu core.

Only way to move forward is to sacrifice backward compatability.

Makes sense to me.... (1, Interesting)

Amiga Trombone (592952) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973520)

...considering the alternative. Itanium is certainly a decent high end processor, but really, what advantage does it have on the high end not offered by Power, Sparc, PA-Risc, etc? Also, in x86 compatibilty mode, it suffers a rather significant performance hit, so as a drop in replacement for x86 it's value is limited. And the complexity of writing decent VLSI compiliers calls into question whether software will ever be able to take advantage of the performance the processor is theoretically capable of. Where as x86-64 can run current software with equal or better performance, and new applications written to the 64 bit instruction set can be phased in non-disruptively. Itanium may be nice, but for the kinds of applications where it could be used to advantage, I don't see where it has any advantage over other common RISC processors.

Re:Makes sense to me.... (3, Informative)

binaryDigit (557647) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973645)

but really, what advantage does it have on the high end not offered by Power, Sparc, PA-Risc, etc

Simple, the ability to run M$ operating systems (which the other chips no longer have). As long as M$ has it's weight behind the thing, then Intel will always have a significant advantage. Reasonable (though not stellar by any stretch) x86 compatibility also helps.

Clarification (5, Insightful)

KidSock (150684) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973522)

First, this was not a USENET post. It's a message from the linux kernel mailing list that google is pumping into their groups.google.com database. Second, Linus is not saying he thinks Hammer is a better architecture. What he said in this message was that the current Linux page table implementation is not ideal for use with IA64 and therefore, for the sake of Linux servers everywhere, it would be better for Hammer to provail in the near to medium term future. I don't know his real position, but I would be very surprised if Linus though Hammer was a "better" architecture. X86 is an awkward instruction set that has been perpetuated by software designed to run on it. The core of these chips like Pentiums are really RISC chips with hardware wrappers to implement the X86 instructions. So it's just a waste if die space. IA64 is purer and a much better long term choice. Don't over analize a simple e-mail message from someone on lkml. These are not markedroid approved public service announcements.

AMD's kernel summit presentation (5, Informative)

awptic (211411) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973524)


For anyone who has an hour and a half to spare... AMD (along with a few people from SuSE) made a great presentation on the X86-64 technology at the Linux kernel summit in Ottawa a little while back; the MP3 and OGG files are available at the sourceforge kernel foundry [sourceforge.net].

Not as much praise is it's made out to be? (2, Informative)

mwarps (2650) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973525)

Linus seems to be more concerned with the wide-range functionality of the specific hardware than the "brand" of it. Making Linux work with x86-64 looks to be easier than making it work "properly" (eg with fully 64-bit page sizes, addresses, etc) with IA64. Then again, IA64 is so broken and slow, it really doesn't matter much in the grand scheme of things if they can make a little go a long way with the Hammer. These small deficiencies the counterpoint poster to Linus makes reference to don't seem to be necessary to make things work..

Regardless of who's winning the CPU war, it's nice to see that Linux is running on all the competitors.

Why is this so groundbreaking? (4, Interesting)

Jeppe Salvesen (101622) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973527)

I thought we supported this stuff for the other 64 bit processors? Aren't we fully 64-bit yet?

Misleading Headline... (2, Informative)

Tall Rob Mc (579885) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973529)

We're not moving to a 64-bit index for the next few years. We're a lot more likely to make PAGE_SIZE bigger, and generally praying that AMD's x86-64 succeeds in the market, forcing Intel to make Yamhill their standard platform. At which point we _could_ make things truly 64 bits (the size pressure on "struct page" is largely due to HIGHMEM, and gcc does fine on 64-bit platforms).

It sounds to me like he's praying for standardization of the 64 bit architecture, not the success of the AMD Hammer.

You should visit Yamhill sometime, it's pretty (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973533)

http://www.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp?location=QFCR C4IYYzhLR2APK0ytgKcvM0MY7awwMofoL7B68YS9bkG7%2fwdm z%2fo%2fnb29cjUR7Ic1Rkrgfu%2bXPuVYoHLzP2BjEn0eNyWT MFeyzTb5i0E%3d&address=yamhill&city=portland&state =or&zipcode=&country=US&addtohistory=

x86, why can't you just die? (5, Insightful)

MORTAR_COMBAT! (589963) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973534)

it's funny how people ripped and ripped and ripped on Intel all through the 90s about keeping all their backward compatibility from 286 on through the P4. how people said they should cut the dead weight, etc.

well, now AMD is creating the kruftiest, heaviest, nastiest instruction set of backwards-compatible crud in the history of processor-dom. Intel comes out with a new, no-legacy 64-bit instruction set, and all of a sudden it is, "god, we hope AMD wins so all our old crap still works".

well anyway, here's at least one programmer who is looking forward to getting his mitts on a 64-bit chip which doesn't have layer upon layer of backwards compatibility, wrapped in an overpowered muscle-car of silicon. you'd think we would have learned our lesson with the Alpha, a much, much better chip than the x86 but no one adopted it. people scream and bitch and moan about supporting all the ancient krufty x86 bloat, but when it comes time, they stick with what is comfortable.

more than likely, Intel's 64-bit offering will follow the road of Alpha into technical superiority and market disaster. and we'll be stuck still supporting 286 instructions. way to go.

COME ON, IT'S A FAKE! (-1, Troll)

Grim Metamoderator (178266) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973542)

This is just another of Shoeboy's forged LKML postings. Ignore it. Linus has been a nearly rabid Intel advocate for years -- why would he suddenly flip-flop like this?

Re:COME ON, IT'S A FAKE! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973627)

Perhaps because he works for transmeta. And intel's stiff competition is forcing trasmeta to lay off a chunk of workers? Perhaps also because the x86-64 port effort is dedicated to opensource, and intel is still tight fisted about everything. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but intel has released 0 lines of open source code so far, right? Hell, even Microsoft released the source to their .NET rotor, albeit under a shitty license.)

Who cares? (0, Offtopic)

Mirus Nex (203801) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973545)

With my current love of OS X I could care less what's happening in the "WIntel" world. I'm the only one at my work that uses Linux on the desktop because we only have x86 based destop systems. I'd be more than happy to dump this system for a G4 dual 1GHz. I'm not knocking Linux at all, in fact I still love it for a server environment, but with all the "hoopla" over the GUI it needs to grow up a bit. I've been happily using Linux on my desktop for almost 10 years straight at work while everyone else has gone through the headache of upgrading Windows, and the ugliness that is XP...Hell, my 6mo old daughter could design a better looking interface. Anyway, I'm just not excited about anything on the x86 front anymore. How far off is the ia-64 from it's original release date? Wasn't it scheduled for release in 2000? Bah...

I worked on IA64/linux at Intel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973566)

The IA64 instruction set is much more innovative than the old x86. Linux in particular benefits from smart compilers that achieve benefits many times what is expected from clock speed. AMD's version deserves to wither on the vine.

Transmeta vs. IA-64 (1, Redundant)

Animats (122034) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973625)

He's praying that he doesn't have to try to implement "code morphing" for the Inanium instruction set.

The OS problems for IA-64 are minor, but the compiler problems are very tough.

Praying for Hammer to Win??? (wrong) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3973646)

RTFA , where does Linus say he want hammer to win. He only says he wants it to succeed so Intel will adopt 64 bit too.

Linus Shut Up (1)

TandyMasterControl (136043) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973648)

Oh yeah, that's a fine way to thank Intel for all the support they have given Linux and yourself over the years. Can't you just maintain neutrality, as Intel has done publicly with respect to the Microsoft/Linux struggle?

A non windows biased post! (-1, Flamebait)

Pooh (4401) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973649)

I'm suprised that the slashdot editor didn't talk about the impact of this "story" on his Windows life-style.

Since a while, all slashdot editors can't stop bashing windows and talk about their games and/or Microsoft product usage the next post.

They suck all dicks around, Linus and Gates as well.

Market Split comming! (3, Interesting)

3seas (184403) | more than 11 years ago | (#3973651)

Don't you see it comming.....all the way down to hardware...on one side the DRM and such products and the other the open systems
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...