New Processor Design from Sun Microsystems

IQ writes "This NYTimes article discusses Sun's latest chip, known as Microprocessor Architecture for Java Computing or MAJC. Looks like a huge, fast MultiDiePackage with a lotta chips. " Fits in well with Sun's continuing attempt to route around Intel-these chips are look like they are philosphically aligned with Jini. More specs will be coming out later on this month. (Free login required @ NYT).

Comments

Useful or not?

[sporty]

This could be useful...

1. Just like PC chips understand x86 instructions... as a new standard, just like the PIII and whatnot
2. This type of technology can no doubtedly be moved over to other architectures easily. If a lot of the java code gets interpreted inside the chip, other architectures can take on this quality.
3. Turn it into a PCI mounted board and make it portable to those with those welded in CPU's or just plain old stuff..

Then again...

1. Hopefully this won't require some sort of software support like the Cyrix CPU's did with their drivers.
2. Sun won't make a big deal over outsourcing this

Just some ideas to spout out.

Java bytecodes

[DonkPunch]

I'm seeing a lot of posts saying that chips designed for a specific language are a Bad Thing. I tend to agree.

BUT I think this argument overlooks something important. A Java chip would not interpret Java at the brace-and-semicolon level, it would read Java bytecodes. Java bytecodes are basically machine language for a microprocessor that exists only in software. It is only logical to make such a chip in hardware eventually.

Furthermore, if the specs for a "Java chip" are open, what is to keep compiler writers from implementing back-ends which write Java bytecodes? I'm not a compiler writer, but it seems like it would be quite possible to implement, for example, a C or C++ compiler which writes Java bytecodes instead of x86/68000/Alpha/Sparc/whatever machine code. Such a compiler would make the "Java chip" usable by people who don't like writing Java.

I seem to recall seeing at least one compiler that takes a non-Java language (Perl, I think) and compiles it to Java bytecodes. Also, I know there is one regular slashdot reader who is doing Java programming at the assembly level -- any comments? If a Java chip sees widespread use, anything-to-bytecode compilers would seem inevitable.

Pre-flame self correction

[DonkPunch]

JPython -- Python to Java bytecodes. Not Perl. Many apologies.

Re:I agree, java chips will flounder.

[toriver]

I don't see a need for chips optimized to run an intereted language.

You don't see a need for a processor with instructions like

aload someString
invokevirtual SomeClass::setProperty()V

but have no problem with processors with instructions like

mov eax, someString
mov cx, itsLength
jsr setProperty

What is the difference you percieve other than the Java machine is stack-based? In what way are the x86 instructions not "interpreted"?

Translation Requested!

[volsung]

Okay, I'm not up on my Vague-Tech-Reporting lingo. Does this mean we'll be seeing a CPU that runs Java bytecodes natively? If that is case, kudos to Sun! I'm really impressed with Java as a language, and I would like to see Java programs run at something resembling native binary speeds.

Of course, if this isn't what Sun is proposing, could someone tell me what this means?

Decent info at EE Times

[ChrisRijk]

Sun conjures Java CPU for media apps at the EE Times.

The EE Times also has an article about next gen server technology IBM (via Sequent) and some info about Sun's next-gen stuff. As usual, Sun are saying very little. From what I've heard seperately though, Sun are working on both a form of NUMA and something else called COMA (Cache-Only Memory Architecture). They might be doing both (on the same machine) for their next-gen server - Project Serengheti, because NUMA is good for some types of applications, while COMA is good for others, so by doing both, the end-users can choose which memory architecture best suits their needs.

these should make some appliances...

[lost_packet]

I was just reading an article about this over at msnbc. It was more in-depth than the nytimes article. There were a few things that really caught my eye at msnbc

...Sun officials already audaciously refer to MAJC as the most important semiconductor architecture of the next 20 years. In part, that's because the chip is particularly well-suited, they say, to handling the enormous streams of visual and audio data expected in the multimedia age. In addition, MAJC should yield a family of microprocessors that are easy to program using Sun's Java language, that can be used in everything from cheap consumer devices to Internet server computers, and that over time will grow even more powerful, and more quickly, than rival chips...

...Sun, for instance, claims that within several years, it should be possible to generate an interactive computer-animated movie like Toy Story in real time using a single MAJC chip...

Yup - going back to roots

[ChrisRijk]

See this JavaWorld article from a former Sun engineer. This is about Java from the embedded point of view.

More Info

[ragnar]

There are more articles (that don't require annoying registrations) at The Register, News.com and Techweb.

Solaris Central will also be covering additional news and updates to the processor. It should be interesting to see what unfolds...

Why The Skepticism?

[__aasmho4525]

For quite some time now, we've all watched the worldwide criticism of specialized hardware that implements a more abstract instruction set, lisp, java, smalltalk (not sure if the latter actually was turned into hardware), etc. Why is the criticism so harsh? I've not yet really seen anyone GIVE IT A CHANCE before discarding it as a toy. First, a disclaimer: I happen to think java is the best language (ok, toolkit, platform, etc.) that's come around in a long time for general-purpose programming (NOT for operating systems, but hear me out here...). Like it or not, the vast majority (i'd venture a guess at 90%) of software written is NOT (and need not be) of operating system calibre in terms of robustness, quality, performance, maintainability, etc. In many cases, the life expectancy of the software is far too short, because needs, requirements, etc. change very quickly, to warrant the additional time spent in development. Now, remember, i'm a purist by heart, but i do have a pragmatic side to me too. Occationally, the costs just don't justify the benefits. Again, like it or not, i have worked with a great many people that are under too much pressure, lack the skills, or simply don't care enough about the quality of their work to do a good enough job with an "easy" language, let alone one that lets them shoot their foot even more effectively... Anyone who truly thinks that java is "too slow" on modern hardware with modern dynamic compilation technolgies really does need to do a bit more experimentation on their own. There are few problems that i've needed to solve in the last few years that i couldn't *easily* solve with Java, and never did i think that the quality or performance suffered (especially now with heuristic compilers). Remember now, I wasn't building 30,000 user systems, maybe 3,000. Is it the best tool for *every* job? Hell no. Does it solve some things VERY effectively? Absolutely. Would i still write any software requiring the utmost performance in c or c++? Hell yes. As history has taught me, profiling my code shows that 90% of my time is spent in 5% of the software. Again, what percentage of the software I've written has requirements demanding utmost performance? less than 5 percent. Now, i'm biased, that's clear. But, seeing in the first 3 posts, not one constructive thing could be said, i felt it my duty to *try* and present a more pragmatic opinion... i, personally, would LOVE to take a shot at using a higher-level-of-abstraction instruction set, just to see for myself whether or not they're of utility. i don't have the experience with them to either condemn or praise them. i wish the same humility were infectious. as always, my opinions are mine alone, i speak for only myself, and i apologize if i offend. Peter

Re:Why The Skepticism?

[scrytch]

I'm still waiting for OO to become fashionable. The dominant paradigm still seems to be to write an application that wraps itself around some data in a file somewhere and uses it to configure the app somewhat, using a slightly different app for each type of data. So much for data-driven.

When I receive my data as an object that I can query for its fields, because the app that generated it created it that way, then I'll be impressed. Till then, well, how many of you are writing 20 different scripts to parse syslog 20 different ways?

This isn't necessarily a monopoly

[ToastyKen]

Building a hardware java machine isn't necessarily a monopoly just because Sun is doing it. If Sun doesn't allow anyone ELSE to do it.. THEN that'd be a monopoly.

NYTimes USERID

[Zyber]

login: slashdotid
password: slashdot

also

login:cypherpunks
password:cypherpunks

any others?

One company does everything

[DGregory]

Actually, Jini is open source... anyone can create a Jini device to use or sell. Java is a programming language... anyone can write a program in Java. It's like C++ or Delphi or any of the other programming languages. These are not "one company does everything" technologies.

By hardwiring aspects of the JVM, the Java programs will run faster. This is nothing new, the CISC and RISC chips all have various functions hardwired in.

MAJC is not Java-only

[ChrisRijk]

It's more like a general purpose CPU with some bits to help make it easier to speed up Java, and other languages.