Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

CEO of Centaur Discusses x86 Strategy and Linux

Posted by michael on from the DIY dept.

An anonymous reader writes "This fascinating interview with Glenn Henry, founder of VIA processor subsidiary Centaur Technology, discusses the founding of Centaur, its strategy and products, and why Linux is fundamental to his company's success. Additional topics covered include: how to produce an x86 clone with a few million dollars and a few dozen engineers; the embedded x86 market, and how it compares to the traditional ARM and MIPS based embedded market; why Centaur doesn't compete with AMD and Intel so much as enable x86 to reach new markets; how Linux is enabling greater hardware functionality; the urgent need for pervasive security -- and much more!"

9 of 135 comments (clear)

  1. Wondering by swordboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've been wondering why some company like this doesn't create a "network appliance" specification for all of us to hack on. It would be nice if I could just go buy a Netgear router and roll my own Linux installation. I purchased a Toshiba Magnia SG10 some time ago when they were a couple hundred bucks during the end-of-life period. For a 566mhz Celeron with an honest-to-goodness hard drive and switch on the back, it was hard to go wrong. I immediately wiped the stock Linux OS and rolled FreeBSD on there.

    Wouldn't it be MORE profitable for companies like the aforementioned Netgear to do this? What am I not seeing? Centaur: help us out!

    --

    Life is the leading cause of death in America.
  2. Is x86 the best chip to use by millahtime · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is an x86 or clone really the best chip to take to markey this way? Linux will run on other processors and the x86 isnt' the best archicecture. There are processors that are more efficient, use less power and can run linux.

    Although, I'll admit some of those embedded boards that I have seen are pretty cool and easy to use.



    P.S. I know I can't spell. That's why I'm not an english teacher.

    --
    Evolution or ID?
    1. Re:Is x86 the best chip to use by stratjakt · · Score: 5, Informative

      Whether it's the best "textbook" architecture or not, it's entrenched itself in the computer world so deeply that x86 will be around forever.

      It works, engineers and coders are familiar with it.. The embedded world is still largely about ASM routines and tight little loops that dont leave the cache, etc, etc.. You can write and test your fancy-shamcy hand-assembled routine at your leisure on your desktop computer.... There are plenty of upsides, and the only downside is the "other stuff looks better on paper" argument.

      It's a newcomer to the embedded world, but will no doubt take a strong hold.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:Is x86 the best chip to use by iguana · · Score: 5, Interesting

      As an embedded Linux developer moving from x86 to ARM, there are good reasons to stick with embedded x86.

      - My Linux development PC runs x86 so stuff compiles/runs on my development machine will tftp over to my embedded board and run immediately.

      - The GNU x86 toolchain is WAY easier to use than the cross GCC tools. All GNU (Linux kernel and gcc especially) projects target x86 first and everyone plays catchup. Bugs are found/fixed in x86 first. Features work on x86 first.

      Reasons to move from x86 to ARM.

      - ARM is designed as an embedded CPU and x86 is designed as a desktop CPU. So the ARM has a very simple memory map, you don't have to worry about working around 15 year old cruft (why the foo doesn't a modern x86 boot straight to protected mode?).

      - It's hard to find an x86, even one ostensibly designed for the embedded market, without the "kitchen sink" problem. Our product with >500 parts with an SiS x86 dropped to 300 with an Atmel AT91 ARM. Most of the passive parts on the SiS board were to turn OFF crap we didn't need (IDE controller, SD controller, video controller and so forth).

      - ARM is cheaper. ARM is smaller. ARM uses less power. ARM is cooler (temperature). ARM is cooler (it's a very nifty chip design).

      Just my opinions, lightly flavored with experience.

    3. Re:Is x86 the best chip to use by iguana · · Score: 4, Interesting
      The embedded world is still largely about ASM routines and tight little loops that dont leave the cache, etc, etc.. You can write and test your fancy-shamcy hand-assembled routine at your leisure on your desktop computer....

      Not really. There isn't much assembly necessary on a modern embedded platform. Even the little 4- and 8-bit processors have specialized C compilers available. Assembly is necessary for startup but that's about it; then we just jump to main(). I think Windows game programmers write more assembly than most embedded systems folks do.

      Embedded systems development is just like any other development. How can I get the best product out as quickly as I can? ASM doesn't get me there quickly enough.

      That's why using embedded x86 can be a good fit. It may not be the best technical solution, but we'll get to market quickly because the tools and available leveragable source is so good.

    4. Re:Is x86 the best chip to use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I honestly fell in love with the PPC in college .. It's a lovely architecture

      PPC is nicer than X86 but it's hardly a "lovely architecture." In fact, it's one of the uglier RISC designs.

      - Backwards bit numbering scheme. The MSB is referred to as bit 0. Normally, it's just a matter of convention and makes no difference but there is some inconsistency in the ISA about this. For example, shift counts are stored in the 5 LSBs but indirect segment register indices appear in the upper 5 bits (probably because of the MSB convention.)

      - Some really complex instructions which increase processor complexity. Rotate-with-masked-insertion? That's not RISC. IBM's POWER chips actually need to break down some of the instructions into smaller ops, similar to X86.

      - Flags. It's nice that most flag computations are optional and are only done if explicitly requested, but flags don't belong in a RISC architecture. The way PPC implements them is even more complicated than on most CISC machines: A flag register with 8 4-bit CC fields and additional flags in a separate XER register! (??)

      - A bizarre MMU. The paging scheme isn't as efficient as other architectures, even including X86. Apparently this is IBM legacy cruft from a previous architecture (possibly S360, can't remember.)

      As far as RISC architectures go, Alpha was probably the best by far, and the actual implementation was great starting with the EV6.

  3. I wonder by foidulus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    if they could take this technology and turn it into a "portable pc gaming console" of sorts(of similiar size and shape to the gba) In the article it states that they can run at 533 MHz fanless with a worst case power consumption of 2.5W. Wouldn't it be neat to create a gaming console(kind of like the phantom pc gaming console, only portable) for this with flash cards being the "cartridge"
    Though licensing for the abandon-ware would be a pain. As would trying to standardize the input across a large number of games. But still, it would be friggin' cool to play leisure suit larry while you are bored in class!

  4. Going after a different market by Da_Slayer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think it is a sound idea to go into the niche markets so to speak instead of just jumping into the fray with AMD/Intel. Everyone has had enough of the SSE2 vs 3dnow! extended vs the new kitchen sink it comes with. Those types of things have no real bearing on markets where companies are looking for solutions that are cheap, easy to deploy and know the company is designing the hardware for their problem. Not the company having to make their systems go on the vendors limited products.

    The more competition the better we the consumers are at getting the best products.

    --
    Push harder towards Open Media/Content
  5. cheap laptops by zogger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    we have the cheap desktops now, like the walmart 200 buck boxes, but does anyone make a *new* laptop that uses this guys chips and a via mobo, and is it under 500 clams brand new? what he says is true, and I'm in that 90% range that what passes for a mid range speed is MORE than enough for my purposes. I don't do gaming or weather modeling, etc. That's the breakthrough and the sweetspot general pricing range I am waiting for, the linux laptop,comes complete and works outta-the-box, including wireless, under 500$, and *upgradeable*. Is this possible now? Say it is, I mean, 3-4 years from now I could replace the whole mobo with whatever is cool then, along those lines, yet alone just swapping in a new cpu, etc. And a REAL battery (or batteries even better, in some sort of standardized arrangement, with 12 volt DC input being standard) in it, I'll tote a couple extra lbs, I don't need a laptop to weigh sub-3 lbs, 6-7 is still quite acceptable, it's the same as the ones I have now. His chip at 7 watts sounds great, and 1 ghz is perfectly acceptable. Heck, even if it had a switch to toggle it back and forth between 3 watts and 7 watts would be nice, as in clocked/not clocked.

    Desktops are a different story, you can always swap around parts and do a little drilling and cutting, etc to make anything fit, but laptops are teh sucks for upgrading and working on, more or less, and they are too expensive as they are sold now to change out very often (for me I mean, but bet a lot of other folks feel the same way). I'd get one and use it for my main desktop most of the time then with an external keyboard and my regular mouse and monitor, scrap energy hog desktops, but retain the option of true portability.