Slashdot Mirror
Trillian Project Release Linux for IA-64
Smack writes "The Trillian developer's release of the Linux port to Intel's new IA-64 architecture was made available yesterday on kernel.org. Q & A from the press conference are also available in PDF format. " At the keynote done this morning at LWCE, some of the engineers demonstrated the code - very, very cool. The examples were running Doom as well as an excellent rendering of a skull.
Looks like standard 2.3.x source with an arch/ia64 added.
but I'm not paying a trillian dollars for a 64 bit chip. I'll stick to 32 bit chips, thank you very much.
thank you.
(while :; do (sleep 1; echo HELO insertdomainnamehere.com; sleep 5; echo 'MAIL FROM:<insertemail@addresshere.com>'; sleep 2; echo 'RCPT TO:<flamemaster@linuxone.net>'; sleep 2; echo DATA; sleep 3; echo Subject: FlameOftheWeek; echo; lynx -dump http://www-csag.cs.uiuc.edu/individual/pakin/compl aint?firstname=LinuxOne\&pgraphs=3\&sex= c; echo .; sleep 5; echo QUIT) | nc -v your.mailserver.com 25; done)
(Hope this survives Slashdot previewing)
There are a lot of really cool DOOM projects out there. People have really taken the source and run with it in recent times. The GLDoom project was really neat until the maintainer had a serious accident that killed all the source (which was, IMHO, the reason Carmack decided to GPL the Doom source, so something like that wouldn't happen again).
:)
You should really check out some of the projects (ZDoom is my current favorite). It's amazing how well the original gameplay has held up. There's still nothing as scary as the Cyberdemon coming after you.
Hi, I'm pb, and this is an Offtopic post. But it's important, so don't moderate it, or keep it around 2, okay, guys?
Maybe you've noticed all the images popping up on slashdot lately. Well, it's an easy bug to exploit, I've tested it on a hidden thread (and on my user page, it's nice to have a picture).
Well, the long and the short of it is, security through obscurity is no excuse. I encourage you to do something about this, either by moderating UP that anonymous coward who first showed it to us with his funny Bill Gates post, or by posting a harmless image, or by contacting the staff running Slashdot, or by downloading the recently released Slash code, and checking if it's similar enough to be patched for this. Because if slashdot is vulnerable, the hole will have to be patched both on here, *and* on every site that uses their code.
Thank you.
Also, on the topic at hand: cool. It's always good to have Linux on a new processor, especially early. Of course, we knew this was going to happen, they've been working under NDA for a while, and I trust Linus. Also, people will probably still be waiting for the Monterey, and analyzing how Intel will do with its competition from both AMD and Transmeta now. Anyhow, the next few years should be very interesting.
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
In spite of someone who got his first moderation points and thinks that the history of similar advances is offtopic . . .
You could continue with the same software on that transaction, but you had to buy it again forthe new architecture. It was easy forthe publisher to recompile (the 8086 was designed with thisin mind; it was meant as a transition chip ratherthan the future), but the binaries weren't compatible. I don't remember anyone having an "upgrade," either.
The concernstoday have largely been thatthe old binaries won'trun (ok, the windows side concerns:)
For one thing they promised to release Linux for IA64 on the day the chip ships. titanium isn't even out yet and these goys are shipping code. Frankly I think it's upsetting.
What ever happened to code delays, late shipping and all those other things we have come to expect from software producers ?
Actually I think this was probably just tossed out so Linus and Alan could look at it and asses how they go about merging all that code *before* 2.4.0 hits the road.
What's that dream system's specs now ?
Linux-2.4 - XF86-4.0 - KDE-2.0 - 4way-SMP-Itanium
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
I would guess it's because many idiots would attempt to compare IA-64 software rendered Quake to IA-32 Quake with a 3D accelerator. Since software rendering often isn't even an option with more modern games, it's hard to use more modern games to demo processor performance since what you'll get is video card performance instead. Certainly a lot of people would look at it and go "Hey, my Pentium II runs Quake better than that!" missing the point that the IA-64 was actually doing the work while their Pentium II wasn't.
--
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
Trillian is the Linux Port Project and Itanium is the Processor Formerly Known As Merced
I can't comment on win32 vs. win64.
--Joe--
Program Intellivision!
of participants: HP, CERN, IBM, Intel, et al.
...and tonight, Mr. Kite will challenge the world
Agent 88
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
(Physical Address Extensions) to access up to
8Gb (>32 bits) at least on the $3,300 "Advanced Server"
Sounds like segmented addresses all over again.
Agent 64
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
> "Prefect" sounds too close to "perfect"
...Pluperfect? ...Buckaroo Banzai?"
> -- no way intel holds themself to THAT standard.
Actually, the argument against 'Perfect' is stark proof that the Intel marketing teams have (amazingly) finally mastered the concept of succession -- "What would we call the processor after 'Perfect'?
Let's not forget the red faces at Intel the day after the name 'Pentium' got out, and everyone was asking if the '686' would be Hexium or Sexium.
If you can go to bed, knowing you did a valuable thing today, you're very lucky. If you can't... it's not bedtime
Not to detract from the effort to port to Itanium (it had to have been non-trivial), but I'm curious how much prior effort from the various ports to SPARC, Alpha, and MIPS R4000 (all 64-bit processors) helped pave the way for the port to Itanium. I'm also curious just who will get the coveted Itanium development systems (the thousands and then the tens of thousands) promised to Linux developers, and what the fine print will say about how those systems will be used.
Someone has to point this out:
Theoretically, you *can* run your software on IA-64... it's supposed to be fully backward compatible with IA-32, or so says the press release Q&A. I don't know how well this will work in practice (especially it depends, in your case, on how well MS does with Windows for IA-64... but then, there's always wine), but it shouldn't be a problem.
Supreme Lord High Commander of the Interstellar Task Force for the Eradication of Stupidity
You missed it, there was some kind of a bug in the slash code and people were posting images. Some girl was sucking a cock... it was a gif, I said he made a strong case for "Burn all gifs". Then all the pictures were removed, the bug fixed, and my post was left dangling, looking very stupid.
___________________
rooooar
Because they're demonstrating that stuff is actually running on silicon proper - otherwise it's just be showing off some other manufacturers 3D hardware.
-- Post No Gravy
[I]titanium isn't even out yet and these goys are shipping code.
:)
You know, with names like John Crawford, Don Alpert, and Hans Mulder, Jerry Huck, Bill Worley, and Rajiv Gupta, maybe they are all goys.
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
1. GLDoom is OpenSource, so you o-s fanatics will not give them shit over it.
2. GLDoom has already been ported to 64-bit CPU platforms--my other computer is an SGI O2; it comes with GLDoom. SGI is also writing the C-compiler and other core parts of Linux/IA-64. You figure it out...
What X Windows Server were they using at the demo? Was is a port of real OpenGL, or recompiled XFree86-3.3.x? Or XFree86-4.0beta + Mesa?
What Graphics card?
(guess I should read the article)
---
And what's wrong with calling the next processor "Eccentrica Galumbits, the triple breasted whore."?
It may look cool, but its just vaporware until the IA-64 chips hit the streets, and you can run the demos for yourself.
I only thought that this was trade secreted or some such. Where can you get the demo? Are there any chips that are somewheat using IA-64?
Slashdot social engineering at it's finest
It seems that the people who have replied to this post (and maybe the poster him-/herself as well) are confusing the names of the CPU, called Itanium , and the project porting Linux to it, called Trillian .
That's why Intel is so willing to work with the Linux guys--Linux users will be the ones receiving the greatest benefit from Itanium--they can just recompile their software and--voila--it's optimized for IA64! Meanwhile, Windows users have to wait until all their software vendors do it for them--they have no motivation to move to Itanium if they gain no performance benefit (IA32 code runs slower on Itanium than on a fast PIII). Who do you think is going to be Intel's initial market?
-- The Sheep --
Never knock on Death's door:
More race stuff in one place,
than any one place on the net.
And it's obvious from this page from a document that's been out for quite a while that it has 128 general-purpose regs and 128 floating-point regs, although it uses a register window scheme so you may have to shuffle windows to get at more than the 32 global registers and the 32 registers in the current window (at least for the general registers).
Documentation for the user-mode side of IA-64 has been available for a while; take your choice of Intel's PDF version, HP's PDF version, or HP's HTML version.
(There's some other IA-64 documentation on the HP site, e.g. the IA-64 Software Conventions and Runtime Architecture manual and, if a link to it hasn't already been posted, (an old - August 1999) paper on "The Making of Linux/ia64".
Is there any information on how the IA64 is supposed to perform compared to current 64-bit chips (like the Dec Alpha)? I mean, are we waiting around just to get another been-there-done-that?
"Being right too soon is socially unacceptable." - Robert Heinlein
What about Slartibartfast? Would have been a cooler name than Trillian "Intel Slartibartfast Inside"
Syllable : It's an Operating System
"Ford" was already taken.
"Prefect" sounds too close to "perfect" -- no way intel holds themself to THAT standard.
"Zaphod" and "Beeblebrox" are to hard to remember.
(Tomorrow I will look back on this post and say, "My God, what was I thinking?")
-- In the future, everyone will code Perl for 15 minutes. --
At one point (about a year back) I was, but the picture has all changed.
Most of the software I have is distinctly x86 bound. Most of it isn't open, and came to me via binaries. A large portion of it runs on an OS from that company in Washington State. Almost none of it can pretend to be anything other than games.
For my money, I can't think of anything that looks more interesting in the processor market than TransMeta's Crusoe chip. Technically this is still on the "coming-to-market real-soon-now" list, but so is the Merced (now officialy IA-64).
Given that, I'd rather settle for continuing to be able to run my existing software. I upgrade my system bit-by-bit. Compatibility and continuity are very important!
... and today's pet project has
From the FAQ,
Q6: What is the contribution of each of the members of the Trillian project?
A6: Cygnus is porting GNUPro Toolkit (GCC, G++, GDB). HP is provided the initial kernel and glibc port, and continues to work on the kernel. IBM is providing kernel support. Intel is providing IA-32 support, IA-64 platform port, Apache port, and various drivers. SGI is providing an optimized C compiler and kernel support. VA is leading the project and providing kernel support, boot loader, commands and libraries, Xfree86, Mesa, E & GNOME, and the GIMP.
Wow. Look at all the large companies behind this. IBM, SGI, Intel. All big players. One of the biggest problems that linux faces with hardware, is that of always playing "catch up" with Windows for hardware support. Efforts such as these can only be considered to be a Good Thing for Linux in general.
Speaking as a computer engineer, the IA-64 is one of the few processors that feels truly designed from the ground up.
As such, one of the things Intel did very right was avoiding the craziness when switching between IA-32 and IA-64 code. It looks VERY straightforward: a new instruction in the IA-32 instruction set that jumps to IA-64 code and an IA-64 instruction that jumps to IA-32 code. The IA-32 registers are mapped into the lowest 32 registers on the IA-64 side. This is very much unlike the (IMO) stupid way Intel did protected mode/real mode switching in the IA-32 instruction set, which is complex and downright nasty at times.
As to the other features of the processor (the 128 GP integer registers set up in a processor-managed rotating stack, the 128 FP registers, the 3 different sub-instruction-sets that allow the processor to be seperated into modular pieces, predication, and explicit parallelism), they are shockingly well-designed and make sense from both an engineering and programming viewpoint. I am very much looking forward to running on one!
The crux of the matter is that IA-32 applications should run with no modifications under a properly written IA-64 OS and it should even be possible to run a IA-32 OS with no problems on an IA-64 processor!
"You can represent this entire problem as a 3x2 matrix"