Most of the analysis time (hours on my dual p3/750) is in the "Classifying nonstatic functions" aka classify_nonstatics.sh which as Rusty implied, is a slow n-squared algorithm.
I'm pretty sure this part can be done in 5-20 minutes on my machine by recoding the algorithm to use a join (using the join(1) command) and am testing that now, but don't unfortunately have a bunch of time to spend on it.
I'll put a patch, not guaranteed to work, at http://puffin.external.hp.com/~bame/, if anyone's interested, hopefully tomorrow. Or e-mail me if there's a better place to send this possibly broken patch (besides sending it to Rusty when it seems to be working well).
and sent the result raw (check those lpr/lp options!) to a designjet 650C, which printed it as fast as the network and mechanism allowed. The
650C is pretty slow -- it probably took 15-20 minutes.
the latter but, HP controls PA-RISC, HP does not control IA64. my feeling is after Mckinley ships. Intel will control both the arch and implementation of all future IA64 processors.
PA-RISC is in a deep coma. Limbo land. The problem I see is that they have allready commited to IA64. most of HP's brain trust is working on Mickinley. and the left over is working on PA-8600.
Do they have the resources to start a new design now? and if they did when will it be done?
HP corporate press and some analysts (Gartner?) disagree with the death of PA-RISC. If this PR is correct, HP must already be working on at least PA-8700. The.hp.com in my e-mail address means I can't comment further. And even when PA-RISC dies, the ideas aren't completely dead. Does the IA64 instruction set look more like Pentium or PA-RISC?
Seems to me some people will feel comfortable going to IA-64 right away, and some will probably take a while. Just think how many folks are still running really old OSes. There'll also probably be a short period where the performance of PA-RISC and other current processors overlaps with IA-64 performance, just as there is probably some overlap between Pentium and PA-RISC today.
Linux on PA-RISC gives people the option to convert to Linux sooner and/or cheaper, either converting their existing HP boxes or purchasing new ones, and then switch to Linux on IA-64 later -- two small steps instead of one large one. (Some will continue using HP-UX of course)
This sounds like customer choice, which seems like a good idea.
But the best reason for Linux on PA-RISC is that I have fun helping make it happen!
What about an actual port? One of my duties as an HP booth-dweeb at LinuxExpo was showing Linux booting into user space on a IA-64 simulator. Linux was compiled on a GCC compiler with a crude IA-64 code generator. Recall that HP is co-inventor and co-creator of IA-64: Intel and Hewlett-Packard... first public disclosure of their 64-bit architecture.
The average house today uses 100amp service (220 volts), and most NEW houses need a 200 amp (220 volt) service.
True, though I doubt houses use 100 amps 24 hours a day!
Most current and new houses, and appliances (yes, PCs are guzzlers, but Netwinders and Laptops aren't) are based on the assumption of cheap power. Off-grid solar houses of today use MUCH less power, which is obvious when you consider the solar panel cost of driving the typical energy-inefficient house of today.
Some solar installations are designed to supply high peak power through more batteries -- it's not unusual for a solar home to be able to power all typical shop tools, but maybe not all at once. Ideally one can use "the (solar) grid" to supply the high peak power demands.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm pretty sure this part can be done in 5-20 minutes on my machine by recoding the algorithm to use a join (using the join(1) command) and am testing that now, but don't unfortunately have a bunch of time to spend on it.
I'll put a patch, not guaranteed to work, at http://puffin.external.hp.com/~bame/, if anyone's interested, hopefully tomorrow. Or e-mail me if there's a better place to send this possibly broken patch (besides sending it to Rusty when it seems to be working well).
That wouldn't seem logical if this earlier announcement is true.
but wait a couple of years and HP will be buying and reselling Intel IA64 server hardware building blocks like they do now with IA32.
It wouldn't surprise me if the part of HP currently selling high-end IA32 boxes goes this way.
There'll also probably be a short period where the performance of PA-RISC and other current processors overlaps with IA-64 performance
My personal opinion is the longer overlap with existing and new processors the better -- competition is good.
Yeah, good luck with linux. and PA-RISC. I bet more people will want your big-iron PA systems than dell's new IA64-systems.
Hope so.
Are you working with Merced (erhh iTanium), proto systems?
-- A bunch or questions you will not answer
Some of my friends are working on IA64 stuff. I've used the IA64 simluator but haven't seen the actual working hardware yet.
Do they have the resources to start a new design now? and if they did when will it be done?
HP corporate press and some analysts (Gartner?) disagree with the death of PA-RISC. If this PR is correct, HP must already be working on at least PA-8700. The .hp.com in my e-mail address means I can't comment further. And even when PA-RISC dies, the ideas aren't completely dead. Does the IA64 instruction set look more like Pentium or PA-RISC?
Seems to me some people will feel comfortable going to IA-64 right away, and some will probably take a while. Just think how many folks are still running really old OSes. There'll also probably be a short period where the performance of PA-RISC and other current processors overlaps with IA-64 performance, just as there is probably some overlap between Pentium and PA-RISC today.
Linux on PA-RISC gives people the option to convert to Linux sooner and/or cheaper, either converting their existing HP boxes or purchasing new ones, and then switch to Linux on IA-64 later -- two small steps instead of one large one. (Some will continue using HP-UX of course)
This sounds like customer choice, which seems like a good idea.
But the best reason for Linux on PA-RISC is that I have fun helping make it happen!
What about an actual port? One of my duties as an HP booth-dweeb at LinuxExpo was showing Linux booting into user space on a IA-64 simulator. Linux was compiled on a GCC compiler with a crude IA-64 code generator. Recall that HP is co-inventor and co-creator of IA-64: Intel and Hewlett-Packard ... first public disclosure of their 64-bit architecture.
True, though I doubt houses use 100 amps 24 hours a day!
Most current and new houses, and appliances (yes, PCs are guzzlers, but Netwinders and Laptops aren't) are based on the assumption of cheap power. Off-grid solar houses of today use MUCH less power, which is obvious when you consider the solar panel cost of driving the typical energy-inefficient house of today.
Some solar installations are designed to supply high peak power through more batteries -- it's not unusual for a solar home to be able to power all typical shop tools, but maybe not all at once. Ideally one can use "the (solar) grid" to supply the high peak power demands.
I'm no expert so check it out: Home Power Magazine, www.crest.org, Nation Renewable Energy Laboratory.