So what is this to be attached to? A virtual motherboard with non-Nvidia / Intel / Marvel / Broadcom... virtual chipsets? This will be quite a long march to the desktop....
not really. the plan is to release it exclusively as an EOMA-68 module, which itself will be both the EVB *and* the mass-production PCB (just in a metal case). what we'll do is the same thing as done with the Allwinner A10 card: make the module power-able from the USB-OTG as a stand-alone computer, that also has an HDMI output. so it'd be a larger version of these USB-dongle-computers like the MK-802, except with more "oomph" and the option of being able to plug it directly into desktop chassis', tablet chassis', laptop chassis' etc. etc. if that sounds like pie-in-the-sky, it most certainly isn't: if you've heard of the KDE "Spark" Tablet, for various reasons they'd like us to design the tablet. we've got most of the components sourced, just need to find a casework designer with a good price, and we're off.
So will this 100% free processor follow a 100% free fabrication process?
interesting question! if it became an issue, i'd get quite pissed and would, if forced to, look for alternative processor designs. that's the whole point of the EOMA-68 and the Rhombus-Tech strategy: the products are *not* dependent on one particular CPU - processors are on *modules* that are completely interchangeable. but... i like the idea. i'll have to think how to handle this one - it's not actually our design.
it's got 64k I & D 1st level, yes to the proper MMU, and the dual-core version has 256k 2nd-level (just enough). they reckon for 8-core that'll have to be increased.
1) 64bit - If not, there will be a need for yet another version at some point. Just do this.
yes. wellll aware of this:) have to be scheduled for the next version unfortunately.
2) Double precision floating point in hardware (for + - * / and preferably rsqrt)
it must have. i'll ask though.
3) GCC support.
ah no. this design is too different for gcc to handle. their compiler expert - someone with over 15 continuous years expertise in compiler design - chose open64 instead (which used gcc's front-end at some point, and so the whole compiler chain is *entirely* GPLv2 licensed).
4) LLVM support
don't know! good question.
5) LLVM-Pipe for OpenGL support
shouldn't need it... he said. i'll have to ask
6) It would be nice if some instructions were optimized for running virtual machines.
good point! i'll ask. in the mean-time (and esp. if it's not), i recently looked at LXC. replaced a set of 5 XEN instances in about 3 hours flat. first one was a bit hairy, the rest were almost a cut/paste by-rote job. it's going well. thoroughly recommend it.
I haven't looked into what makes sense for #6, but with all the VMs around it would be nice to have them run efficiently.
So you're volunteering to write the compiler, right?
the team's done it already.
And porting Linux to a completely new architecture?
and that, too. and android on top of that.
relax - it's been taken care of. come on - think, 007. would i *really* have put this up as a proposal if the compiler and the linux port hadn't already been done? doh!:)
Forget the performance numbers, the whole thing is bullshit:
* The proposal is dated December 2, 2012
pay attention 007: we're aiming for mid-2013, not yesterday:) literally yesterday: today's the 4th, right? also, we're open to all kinds of investment opportunities. this article is a heads-up.
also, bear in mind: the core design's already proven. mid-2013, whilst pretty aggressive, is doable *SO LONG AS* we *DO NOT* do any "design" work. just building-blocks, stack them together, run the verification tools, run it in FPGAs to check it works, run the verification tools again... etc. etc.
the teams we're working with know what they're doing. me? i have no clue, and am quite happy not knowing: this is waaay beyond my expertise level and time to learn. i'm quite happy to let other people do this. if you can help provide some useful feedback, input, or even have the expertise that can be contracted out to you, GREAT.
split the graphics chipset into another PCI-E board, and sell it seperately, that works with x86..
in x86-land, yes. in ARM-land, yes. MIPS, funnily enough no: look up MIPS64-ASE-3D. ingenic jz4760 and below: no (look up X-Burst).
this chip is more like MIPS-with-3D-ASE, or Ingenic-with-XBurst. you *can't* separate the GPU from the CPU: they're one and the same. ok, you could... but you'd end up with two identical processors connected by some sort of fast bus... why bother? why not just double the number of cores?
"So have at it: if given carte blanche, what interfaces and what features would you like an FSF-Endorseable mass-volume processor to have?"
thank you for taking me literally! really appreciated!
Standard size chip socket, with adapter springs and guides for using off the shelf cooling implements (like zalman fans, and watercooling), for other CPUs.
ah. this is going to be a 15mm x 15mm BGA with only around 320 pins. it's tiny. ok, that might have to be revisited now that i thought about doing an 8-core monster - 3 watts in a 15 x 15mm package is hellishly hot. i'm still debating whether it should have dual 32-bit DDR3 lanes. even so, that only adds an extra... 75 or so pins, bringing it up maybe to 19 x 19 mm.
need PCI and PCI express, prefrably at least 24 lanes, hopefully as many as 48 lanes.
ahhh... PCI express is a bug-bear. that many lanes would, on their own, turn this into a 12 to 30 watt part: right now we're aiming for a different market. i'm happy to be steered in a different direction if it can be shown that it's a genuinely good idea, with a high chance of return on investment.
Behind this, fast northside/southside busses to keepup with the following, I think AMD open sourced hypertransport, so front side bussing should not be an issue.
ah this is an embedded processor: they don't have northbridge/southbridge buses [at all]. those are reserved for CPUs at the 10+ watt market.
If your still mulling over instruction set, a built in crypto proccessing chip would ROCK. implement intels AES-NI or something similar, plus more for twofish, serpent, and other fairly mainstream modern, unbroken Free/Open encryption algorythms. Then add hash instructions for the entire SHA family of hashes, MD6, whirlpool, tiger, RIPMED, and GOST
ok - this is a general-purpose processor that *happens* to have been designed to be capable of doing a GPU and a VPU's job. hmmm... i wonder whether their instruction set can do crypto primitives.. hmmm.... yeah, that's a great question to ask. i'll get back to you on that.
GOOD USB 3 support, with legacy suppoequivsrt for 1 and 2. Not only do I want some ports on the back, I want at least 3-4 banks of header pins on a theorhetical motherboard for front panel devices and ports. They shtheorheticalould be USB 1,2,3. Solid high speed memory controller at a preimium.
definitely going to have 1x USB-OTG, probably 2x USB2-HOST, and at least one USB-3.
Universial SATA support for revisions 1,2 and 3 (1.5GB/s 3.0 GB/s and 6.0 GBs respectively), built in RAID controller. eSATA would help too.
i'm reluctant to push this IC towards 6gb/sec - it'd be by far and above the fastest bit of I/O on the chip. RAID i'd be concerned about pushing up the cost for the mass-volume uses [which wouldn't use it]. eSATA is _great_. i'd forgotten about that.
scalable audio chipset capable of up to 8.1 surround, Stereo input, SPID/F and all the other great audio features.
SPDIF - i'd not *entirely* forgotten about that - will remember to make a mental note. audio i would like to rely on the processor itself for that sort of thing (for basic audio - headphones and the like), otherwise handing off to a standard I2S/AC97 audio IC for cases where people really want more complex audio. there are 3 I2S interfaces i think.
so, yeah - i want audio to be done more like the TI McBSP. DMA-driven, but use the main processor for audio handling. keep it simple.
DDR3 RAM, or something comparable.
already done. 1333mhz. bit concerned personally about the power consumption of 1333mhz, i know that 800mhz is about 0.3 watts for example: 1333mhz is starting to get to 1 maybe 1.5 watts all on its own!
>The deadline: > July 2013 for first mass-produced silicon > >The cost: > $USD 10 million
This poster has either no idea or is dreaming.
both. i have no clue - that's why i posted this article online, as a way to solicit input and to double-check things - and i'm dreaming of success.
In 6 months he will not have an SoC through potentially several tape-outs, having first done System Engineering, Design, Synthesis, Layout, Verification, Validation,
what i haven't mentioned is that one of my associates (my mentor) used to work for LSI Logic, and he later went on to be Samsung's global head of R&D. he knows the ropes - i don't. we've been in constant communication, and also in touch with some people that he knows - long story but we have access to some of the best people who *have* done this sort of thing.
Documentation,
ahh, my old enemy: Documentation. [kung fu panda quote. sorry...] - yes, this is probably going to lag. at least there will be source code which we know already works. not having complete documentation has worked out quite well for the Allwinner A10 SoC, wouldn't you agree?
also, because this is going to be a Rhombus Tech Project, the CPU will *not* be available for sale separately. it will *ONLY* be available as an EOMA-68 module. no arguments over the hardware design. no *need* to do complex hardware designs. the EVB Board will *be* the "Production Unit" - just in a case, instead.
so by deploying that strategy, Documentation is minimised. heck, most factories in China have absolutely no clue what they're making. it might as well be shoes or handbags, for all they know. heck, many of the factories we've seen actually *make* shoes and handbags, and their owners have gone "i know, let's diversify, let's make tablets". you think they care about Documentation?:)... ok, i know what you mean.
... and seemingly all without an existing organization.
yeah. it's amazing what you can do if you're prepared to say "i don't know what i'm doing" and ask other people for help rather than try to keep everything secret, controlled and "in-house". my associates are tearing their hair out, i can tell you:)
Or are SoC manufacturers lately doing short-term build-to-order processors. And the 10 million are not going to cover the necessary cost for all of the above. The masks alone might be that expensive depending on the number of tape-outs necessary (which - without an existing organization and working design flow - will be a lot).
well, because i know nothing, i've asked people who do know and have a lot of experience. the procedure we'll be following is to get an independent 3rd party - one that partners with the foundry - and get them to do the verification, even if the designers themselves have run the exact same tools. if it then goes wrong, we can tell them to fix it... *without* the extra cost of another set of masks. a kind of insurance, if you will.
but the other thing we are doing is: there will be *no* additional "design". it's a building-block exercise. the existing design is already proven in 65nm under the MVP Programme: USB-OTG works, DDR3/1333mhz works, RGB/TTL works, the core works, PWM works, I2S works, SD/MMC works and so on. all we're doing is asking them to dial up the macros to put down a few more cores, and surround it with additional well-proven hard macros (HDMI, USB3, SATA-II).
does that sound like a strategy which would, in your opinion, minimise the costs and increase the chances of first time success?
well, tell you what, rather than accusing, why don't you ask me to ask them? i can do that if you like.
a real memory controller that could keep the chip fed with data at that rate will use > 3 watts all by itself. This chip won't have a real memory controller though,
that's plain wrong - the current revision has 1333mhz DDR3 right *now*. unless you consider 1333mhz 32-bit DDR3 not to be a real memory controller?
you're also assuming that the data being crunched requires only one FLOP per number. you should know - you're on slashdot after all - that there's no correlation between the on/off-chip memory requirements and the on-chip processing requirements.
basically, you *know* that just because you're running the CPU at 100% capacity crunching numbers, does *not* mean that you have to run the memory bandwidth at 100% capacity as well. pay attention 007:)
H.264 can't (legally) be encoded without paying for a license... interesting choice for an example.
it's the hardest one to do, because of the inherently non-paralliseable CABAC decode (ok, there's a guy at MIT who came up with a probabilistic algorithm that guesses the block chain reasonably accurately).
if you're referring to patents, there's a little-known aspect of patent law which entitles individuals to create "one instance" of an invention, in order that they may "further improve on it". so if you download the source code, compile it up and, if questioned, cite patent law....
That architecture is horribly outdated, loaded down with things that sort-of made sense in the 1970s. Today's x86 CPUs are just dressed up RISC machines; let's free up some of that chip space and just use RISC.
this team have come from the perspective of what makes a good GPU, then turned it into a CPU. it's about as far as you can get from x86 as you can possibly get. luckily they've done the hard part of porting at least one OS (android) so have proven the tools, the compiler, the kernel, everythine.
with linux now being the main OS it's hard for me to even remember that windows and x86 was relevant at one point. not that i'm ruling out the possibility of MS porting windows to this chip: if they want to, that's great: they'll just have to bear in mind that there will be no DRM so they won't be able to lock everyone out.
If you want to run x86 binaries, use a dynamic translation tool.
who was it.... i think it was ICT who put 200 special instructions into the Loongson 2H, which allow it to accelerate-emulate the most common x86 instructions, they got 70% of the main processor speed.
If this processor is going to be designed and licensed under GPLv3 - I guess one won't be able to build any license-compatible proprietary software for it either. Curious - but count me out:)
ah interesting. no, it wouldn't be. i believe there are two separate misunderstandings here.
first: i did actually look some time ago at LEONv..... v2 i think it is, which is LGPL licensed i think by Gaisler Research but the amount of work needed to turn it into a modern GPU/VPU-competitive processor would be too costly. then there is the stuff on http://opencores.org/ but it's not really ready for prime-time - i've been keeping an eye on the projects there for quite some time [none of them are SMP capable for example]
instead, i kept hunting, spoke to tensilica about their core (which is superb btw!), talked to synopsis about their core (ARC), and even came up with a way to do software-interrupt-driven SMP (yes i ran it by alan cox on LKML!). when this current design popped up, and i saw both its capabilities and that they are willing to respect the GPL regarding the toolchain, i jumped at the chance.
second misunderstanding is over design of *hardware* impacting what *software* it can run. it would be necessary to have a modified version of the GPL, stating "all and any software programs running on this hardware *must* be GPL licensed". the impact that this would have would be extremely problematic, as well as being rather fascist and not in the spirit of free software at all.... and, also, as it would be a modified version of the GPL, it wouldn't *be* the GPL, so could not be FSF-Endorsed.
with that as background, to answer the question directly: this is a proprietary design just like all other proprietary designs, using off-the-shelf completed and *tested* hard macros (including the core processor itself albeit only under the MVP Programme), where there is no restriction of any kind on the software that can be run on that processor, be it free software or proprietary software.
i can help address this one, immediately. i'm working on the rhombus-tech project, and am designing a tablet for the KDE "Plasma" Team after they ran into severe reliability issues, GPL violations, unannounced design changes, unnanounced *processor* changes (which of course completely messes things up for them because they have to start again with the porting efforts).
let me start with the phrase "intellectual property" and go from there. intellect -> intelligence; property - > ownership -> enslavement. so the phrase "intellectual property" actually means "intelligence enslavement". the purpose of the phrase "intellectual property" is to enslave anyone who is intelligent. from this perspective we can see what it is *really* used for.
i can definitely attest that intelligence enslavement has been used to adversely affect my right to develop a commercial capitalistic product which is to be sold at profit.
i have contacted *countless* IC suppliers, for audio, camera, wifi, 3G, accelerometer, touchscreen products. the answers have varied from non-existent to "who the hell are you" to intrusive requests for information to "please sign this NDA".
in the end i went, "this is ridiculous. it's as if i'm being treated as some sort of criminal or fraudster (which many suppliers often truly believe that you are). i cannot be bothered with this"
so i created a design which uses an STM32F instead, and i will be programming it to emulate the various functions needed, purely in software, GPLv3 or LGPLv3 licensed. i've had it with these companies who want to "protect" (i.e. enslave) information. audio will be done as Digital PWM using a couple of $0.12 0.5 watt amplifiers: i found the circuits online. camera will be done using 15 pins on the STM32F, emulated entirely in software, the source code *already* exists, google "followingrobot".
ironically this approach will actually *save* money. a company called http://www.icbase.com/ quoted me $2.36 for 10k units of the LQFP-100 mid-end STM32F FOB out of HK (they sell enormous volume). by contrast, an Audio IC costs about $1.50, a Camera IC costs about $1.50, and so on - even just those two ICs alone puts you above the cost of the STM32F.
does that help demonstrate how this is a real problem, not an intellectual exercise?
ok, i don't know if anyone else has spotted this, but there's a link between avogadro's constant, background radiation, and golden mean ratio.
take the background radiation (number of hydrogen atoms per square metre). divide by golden mean ratio cubed. invert. the number, completely coincidentally, comes out to around 6.023e23.
a friend of mine just started at portsmouth university, studying marine biology, and we happened to talk about this subject. the situation's actually much worse than being reported here, because the coral reefs are *also* being corroded. given that coral reefs are where the majority of the ocean's life-forms congregate, if that eco-system collapses we're in real serious trouble. i say trouble: the planet's likely to survive, and to re-generate life over the next hundred millenia or so. it's just that humans really won't be around to enjoy being here, that's all.
* the country which uses 50% of the world's resources yet has only 12% of the world's population
* that has not signed the Kyoto Accord and has China being forced into a position of making a "big fuss" so that the USA can "save face" (China's next 10 year plan involves carbon emissions reductions far in excess of the Kyoto Accord)
* that has created more wars and destabilised more countries, broken more international laws and blatantly disregarded sovereignty more than any other country in the history of mankind in the name of "oil" and "profit"
why is that this country, rather than take responsibility for its over-use of resources, comes up with yet *MORE* ways to justify continuing down the path of take, take take.
surely they can see that it's not going end, here, right? surely they can see that even if they subjugated or bombed every other country in the world into submission or non-existence, the resource over-utilisation would, like cancer, just continue to consume more and more and ultimately end up consuming itself.
*surely* they can see that, right? so the question is: what do we - the rest of the world - actually do about this?
where's that slashdot article that came up a couple of days ago, about velomobiles being 80x more efficient than electric cars? didn't it have some quite obvious maths that showed that if all cars in the USA were converted to electric, it would require 7,000 GWh of electricity just to charge them every day? what that velomobiles article didn't also cover is that it's highly unlikely that the world has enough lithium and neodymium to go round to supply all those vehicles.
i've *done* the analysis and the designs (http://lkcl.net/ev) and if EVs are to be the success that people really really WANT them to be, then they have to be ultra-efficient (350kg) ultra-streamlined (Cd 0.15) parallel diesel hybrids with a 5kW (7HP) diesel motor and a 10kW (13HP) electric motor running off of a CVT (quadbike) gearbox.
perhaps this is some sort of spiritual test of my patience when people make these kinds of statements "elon musk will be the next steve jobs for recommending that the world's population use more of our planet's natural resources than its humans can actually get hold of", or am i missing something here?
The rebels in this case are committing attrocities left and right, they're flying the flag of Al Queda, they're not our friends, and they're not the enemy of our enemy in a way that makes it valuable to help them out. We have no business being in any of these rebellions from Libya all through the middle east.
That's just insanity and screw you main stream media and leftists and democrats for not screaming bloody murder about it.
ah you've seen "Charlie Wilson's War", then, i take it? remember the analyst's advice? the CIA *funded* the Taliban in a fight against Russian-funded incursions in a black-ops operation that started out with a budget of i think it was $USD5m that ended up around half a BILLION dollars.
the same analyst *also* said, "look - these guys you're funding - the Taliban - yes you're winning the 'war' but you're tearing their country apart to do it. afterwards, you're going to have to help rebuild their infrastructure, otherwise they're going to get PISSED. it's not going to cost much, but you've gotta do it".
so, this guy - charlie - takes the analyst's advice and goes off back to congress, just like he did for the other operations. the film dedicates i think it is about 1 minute to this part of the war. in this scene, the film portrays - against a background of silence devoid of "dramatising music" to get the point home - some unbelievably crass politician basically says, "well we won the war, what are you complaining about, son?"
you might want to think about that before mouthing off about things are going out there, yeah?
Formula 1 all the way down to Formula 3000 uses GPS to get millimetre accuracy. how can they do that, you ask, when the GPS signals are scrambled in the lower bits? well - and this i heard about as far back as 1993 when i was working for Pi Technology - all that is needed is one single low-power GPS transmitter, placed in the centre of the track which *is* accurate. the GPS receivers lock on to that; this gives a concentric ring of millimetre-level accuracy and the remaining GPS satellites can be used to pinpoint the location.
the point is: a powerful enough (or localised) set of transmissions could easily be used to fake the position such that standard GPS receivers would be fooled, thus defeating any GPS-based "security". what's great about that for the terrorists is that any Cruise Missiles or UAVs homing in on their position might also go "huh??" and take a sharp random turn against a cliff. good, eh? mmm....
this is about mathematics creating standing waves in the wind that can actually turn it away.
You can't do that without transferring the momentum onto the object doing the "turning away". That's a simple law of conservation of momentum. You have a mass of air going in one direction and then you have the same mass of air going in a different direction. You have to exert force by something to achieve that, standing waves or not. And as per Newton's third law, the structure is still going to be stressed by the dynamic pressure, only in your case, the building will be forced into oscillations. Big win there, that's even "better".
first thing to say is this: sthapatyaveda buildings are built to *millimetre* accuracy. it's a nightmare for the builders, but that's the requirements, so they get told and that's the end of it.
second thing is: think of a pipe organ, closed at one end: that's a "standing-wave" which creates a pure note. now put two of those, back-to-back, where the house is in the centre of the standing wave. now arrange for the airflow to be directed *around* the house instead of "squashing" it. just like jmc23 says in one of the other posts: think "tai chi". you don't *absorb* the power of the attack, you *redirect* it.
this "modern" building company approach is the "brute force" approach: design the building to take a pounding, solid as a rock. that's... dumb. the quantity of materials alone make it hard to justify.
why not take a softer approach? a mathematical one which causes pockets of air? i mean.... for goodness sake: even the fence height surrounding a sthapatyaveda property is in proportion to the dimensions of the house, which is itself built on a grid where certain walls are allowed to be on the grid lines and others are not (usually the internal ones).... and this is all to *millimetre* accuracy.
the property is *literally* tuned, like a precision instrument. i find this approach to be absolutely fascinating yet there are so few people in the world who appreciate it, and quite likely there are *zero* people in the world who actually understand the fundamental principles on which it's all actually based. so unfortunately everyone has to take it "on faith": i don't. i sort-of intuitively get that there's something real going on, at a mathematical level.
think about it, though: these people attribute "desire" to the "weather", but i believe there's a much more rational explanation: the extensive use of golden mean ratio in the proportions of the building setting up resonance patterns in the wind as the brush fire approached, causing pockets of air surrounding the building, against which the general direction of the fire *literally* had no quotes choice quotes but to change direction. i think it will be the same thing with that temple in india - the one that withstood 150mph winds.
I'm still not buying that house, unless it also sharpens dull razor blades and keeps fruit fresh.
:) you can't: they're happy living in it, and are extremely unlikely to sell - ever. i believe you're thinking of pyramids, or perhaps voodoo magic. this is about mathematics creating standing waves in the wind that can actually turn it away. if you've seen "standing waves" on a storm wall, you'll know what this is about. now take that to 3 dimensions: it's the exact same principle.
sthapatyaveda is aslo about making a conscious choice to live a radically healthier lifestyle. it can be tough as hell to make that kind of committment: you can't just take any old house and convert it (you can, but it's nowhere near as effective). you have to pick good land and so on, and do a *complete* from-scratch build. that level of committment from people and the benefits it has on their health, not to mention being extremely proud and happy that they did something like that, it means you're very very unlikely to ever "buy that house".
Slashdot Mirror
So what is this to be attached to? A virtual motherboard with non-Nvidia / Intel / Marvel / Broadcom... virtual chipsets? This will be quite a long march to the desktop....
not really. the plan is to release it exclusively as an EOMA-68 module, which itself will be both the EVB *and* the mass-production PCB (just in a metal case). what we'll do is the same thing as done with the Allwinner A10 card: make the module power-able from the USB-OTG as a stand-alone computer, that also has an HDMI output. so it'd be a larger version of these USB-dongle-computers like the MK-802, except with more "oomph" and the option of being able to plug it directly into desktop chassis', tablet chassis', laptop chassis' etc. etc. if that sounds like pie-in-the-sky, it most certainly isn't: if you've heard of the KDE "Spark" Tablet, for various reasons they'd like us to design the tablet. we've got most of the components sourced, just need to find a casework designer with a good price, and we're off.
So will this 100% free processor follow a 100% free fabrication process?
interesting question! if it became an issue, i'd get quite pissed and would, if forced to, look for alternative processor designs. that's the whole point of the EOMA-68 and the Rhombus-Tech strategy: the products are *not* dependent on one particular CPU - processors are on *modules* that are completely interchangeable. but... i like the idea. i'll have to think how to handle this one - it's not actually our design.
Off the top of my head:
always the best way :)
0) A proper MMU and at least 1Meg of cache
it's got 64k I & D 1st level, yes to the proper MMU, and the dual-core version has 256k 2nd-level (just enough). they reckon for 8-core that'll have to be increased.
1) 64bit - If not, there will be a need for yet another version at some point. Just do this.
yes. wellll aware of this :) have to be scheduled for the next version unfortunately.
2) Double precision floating point in hardware (for + - * / and preferably rsqrt)
it must have. i'll ask though.
3) GCC support.
ah no. this design is too different for gcc to handle. their compiler expert - someone with over 15 continuous years expertise in compiler design - chose open64 instead (which used gcc's front-end at some point, and so the whole compiler chain is *entirely* GPLv2 licensed).
4) LLVM support
don't know! good question.
5) LLVM-Pipe for OpenGL support
shouldn't need it... he said. i'll have to ask
6) It would be nice if some instructions were optimized for running virtual machines.
good point! i'll ask. in the mean-time (and esp. if it's not), i recently looked at LXC. replaced a set of 5 XEN instances in about 3 hours flat. first one was a bit hairy, the rest were almost a cut/paste by-rote job. it's going well. thoroughly recommend it.
I haven't looked into what makes sense for #6, but with all the VMs around it would be nice to have them run efficiently.
And interconnect them with what?
HDMI?
yeahhh... i hadn't really thought that one through. you kinda need 4 gigabit links, really (minimum)... hmmm....
So you're volunteering to write the compiler, right?
the team's done it already.
And porting Linux to a completely new architecture?
and that, too. and android on top of that.
relax - it's been taken care of. come on - think, 007. would i *really* have put this up as a proposal if the compiler and the linux port hadn't already been done? doh! :)
Forget the performance numbers, the whole thing is bullshit:
* The proposal is dated December 2, 2012
pay attention 007: we're aiming for mid-2013, not yesterday :) literally yesterday: today's the 4th, right? also, we're open to all kinds of investment opportunities. this article is a heads-up.
also, bear in mind: the core design's already proven. mid-2013, whilst pretty aggressive, is doable *SO LONG AS* we *DO NOT* do any "design" work. just building-blocks, stack them together, run the verification tools, run it in FPGAs to check it works, run the verification tools again... etc. etc.
the teams we're working with know what they're doing. me? i have no clue, and am quite happy not knowing: this is waaay beyond my expertise level and time to learn. i'm quite happy to let other people do this. if you can help provide some useful feedback, input, or even have the expertise that can be contracted out to you, GREAT.
split the graphics chipset into another PCI-E board, and sell it seperately, that works with x86. .
in x86-land, yes. in ARM-land, yes. MIPS, funnily enough no: look up MIPS64-ASE-3D. ingenic jz4760 and below: no (look up X-Burst).
this chip is more like MIPS-with-3D-ASE, or Ingenic-with-XBurst. you *can't* separate the GPU from the CPU: they're one and the same. ok, you could... but you'd end up with two identical processors connected by some sort of fast bus... why bother? why not just double the number of cores?
"So have at it: if given carte blanche, what interfaces and what features would you like an FSF-Endorseable mass-volume processor to have?"
thank you for taking me literally! really appreciated!
Standard size chip socket, with adapter springs and guides for using off the shelf cooling implements (like zalman fans, and watercooling), for other CPUs.
ah. this is going to be a 15mm x 15mm BGA with only around 320 pins. it's tiny. ok, that might have to be revisited now that i thought about doing an 8-core monster - 3 watts in a 15 x 15mm package is hellishly hot.
i'm still debating whether it should have dual 32-bit DDR3 lanes. even so, that only adds an extra... 75 or so pins, bringing it up maybe to 19 x 19 mm.
need PCI and PCI express, prefrably at least 24 lanes, hopefully as many as 48 lanes.
ahhh... PCI express is a bug-bear. that many lanes would, on their own, turn this into a 12 to 30 watt part: right now we're aiming for a different market. i'm happy to be steered in a different direction if it can be shown that it's a genuinely good idea, with a high chance of return on investment.
Behind this, fast northside/southside busses to keepup with the following, I think AMD open sourced hypertransport, so front side bussing should not be an issue.
ah this is an embedded processor: they don't have northbridge/southbridge buses [at all]. those are reserved for CPUs at the 10+ watt market.
If your still mulling over instruction set, a built in crypto proccessing chip would ROCK. implement intels AES-NI or something similar, plus more for twofish, serpent, and other fairly mainstream modern, unbroken Free/Open encryption algorythms. Then add hash instructions for the entire SHA family of hashes, MD6, whirlpool, tiger, RIPMED, and GOST
ok - this is a general-purpose processor that *happens* to have been designed to be capable of doing a GPU and a VPU's job. hmmm... i wonder whether their instruction set can do crypto primitives.. hmmm.... yeah, that's a great question to ask. i'll get back to you on that.
GOOD USB 3 support, with legacy suppoequivsrt for 1 and 2. Not only do I want some ports on the back, I want at least 3-4 banks of header pins on a theorhetical motherboard for front panel devices and ports. They shtheorheticalould be USB 1,2,3. Solid high speed memory controller at a preimium.
definitely going to have 1x USB-OTG, probably 2x USB2-HOST, and at least one USB-3.
Universial SATA support for revisions 1,2 and 3 (1.5GB/s 3.0 GB/s and 6.0 GBs respectively), built in RAID controller. eSATA would help too.
i'm reluctant to push this IC towards 6gb/sec - it'd be by far and above the fastest bit of I/O on the chip. RAID i'd be concerned about pushing up the cost for the mass-volume uses [which wouldn't use it]. eSATA is _great_. i'd forgotten about that.
scalable audio chipset capable of up to 8.1 surround, Stereo input, SPID/F and all the other great audio features.
SPDIF - i'd not *entirely* forgotten about that - will remember to make a mental note. audio i would like to rely on the processor itself for that sort of thing (for basic audio - headphones and the like), otherwise handing off to a standard I2S/AC97 audio IC for cases where people really want more complex audio. there are 3 I2S interfaces i think.
so, yeah - i want audio to be done more like the TI McBSP. DMA-driven, but use the main processor for audio handling. keep it simple.
DDR3 RAM, or something comparable.
already done. 1333mhz. bit concerned personally about the power consumption of 1333mhz, i know that 800mhz is about 0.3 watts for example: 1333mhz is starting to get to 1 maybe 1.5 watts all on its own!
Unlocked bootloader with firmware m
From TFA:
>The deadline:
> July 2013 for first mass-produced silicon
>
>The cost:
> $USD 10 million
This poster has either no idea or is dreaming.
both. i have no clue - that's why i posted this article online, as a way to solicit input and to double-check things - and i'm dreaming of success.
In 6 months he will not have an SoC through potentially several tape-outs, having first done System Engineering, Design, Synthesis, Layout, Verification, Validation,
what i haven't mentioned is that one of my associates (my mentor) used to work for LSI Logic, and he later went on to be Samsung's global head of R&D. he knows the ropes - i don't. we've been in constant communication, and also in touch with some people that he knows - long story but we have access to some of the best people who *have* done this sort of thing.
Documentation,
ahh, my old enemy: Documentation. [kung fu panda quote. sorry...] - yes, this is probably going to lag. at least there will be source code which we know already works. not having complete documentation has worked out quite well for the Allwinner A10 SoC, wouldn't you agree?
also, because this is going to be a Rhombus Tech Project, the CPU will *not* be available for sale separately. it will *ONLY* be available as an EOMA-68 module. no arguments over the hardware design. no *need* to do complex hardware designs. the EVB Board will *be* the "Production Unit" - just in a case, instead.
so by deploying that strategy, Documentation is minimised. heck, most factories in China have absolutely no clue what they're making. it might as well be shoes or handbags, for all they know. heck, many of the factories we've seen actually *make* shoes and handbags, and their owners have gone "i know, let's diversify, let's make tablets". you think they care about Documentation? :) ... ok, i know what you mean.
yeah. it's amazing what you can do if you're prepared to say "i don't know what i'm doing" and ask other people for help rather than try to keep everything secret, controlled and "in-house". my associates are tearing their hair out, i can tell you :)
Or are SoC manufacturers lately doing short-term build-to-order processors. And the 10 million are not going to cover the necessary cost for all of the above. The masks alone might be that expensive depending on the number of tape-outs necessary (which - without an existing organization and working design flow - will be a lot).
well, because i know nothing, i've asked people who do know and have a lot of experience. the procedure we'll be following is to get an independent 3rd party - one that partners with the foundry - and get them to do the verification, even if the designers themselves have run the exact same tools. if it then goes wrong, we can tell them to fix it... *without* the extra cost of another set of masks. a kind of insurance, if you will.
but the other thing we are doing is: there will be *no* additional "design". it's a building-block exercise. the existing design is already proven in 65nm under the MVP Programme: USB-OTG works, DDR3/1333mhz works, RGB/TTL works, the core works, PWM works, I2S works, SD/MMC works and so on. all we're doing is asking them to dial up the macros to put down a few more cores, and surround it with additional well-proven hard macros (HDMI, USB3, SATA-II).
does that sound like a strategy which would, in your opinion, minimise the costs and increase the chances of first time success?
Those performance numbers are pure fantasy.
well, tell you what, rather than accusing, why don't you ask me to ask them? i can do that if you like.
a real memory controller that could keep the chip fed with data at that rate will use > 3 watts all by itself. This chip won't have a real memory controller though,
that's plain wrong - the current revision has 1333mhz DDR3 right *now*. unless you consider 1333mhz 32-bit DDR3 not to be a real memory controller?
you're also assuming that the data being crunched requires only one FLOP per number. you should know - you're on slashdot after all - that there's no correlation between the on/off-chip memory requirements and the on-chip processing requirements.
basically, you *know* that just because you're running the CPU at 100% capacity crunching numbers, does *not* mean that you have to run the memory bandwidth at 100% capacity as well. pay attention 007 :)
H.264 can't (legally) be encoded without paying for a license... interesting choice for an example.
it's the hardest one to do, because of the inherently non-paralliseable CABAC decode (ok, there's a guy at MIT who came up with a probabilistic algorithm that guesses the block chain reasonably accurately).
if you're referring to patents, there's a little-known aspect of patent law which entitles individuals to create "one instance" of an invention, in order that they may "further improve on it". so if you download the source code, compile it up and, if questioned, cite patent law....
Didn't see any mention of hardware floating point unit(s). Is that just a given these days?
i believe so, yes - that's why i mentioned the GFLOPS figure. apologies if it wasn't made clear.
Can we please move away from x86?
yes please!
That architecture is horribly outdated, loaded down with things that sort-of made sense in the 1970s. Today's x86 CPUs are just dressed up RISC machines; let's free up some of that chip space and just use RISC.
this team have come from the perspective of what makes a good GPU, then turned it into a CPU. it's about as far as you can get from x86 as you can possibly get. luckily they've done the hard part of porting at least one OS (android) so have proven the tools, the compiler, the kernel, everythine.
with linux now being the main OS it's hard for me to even remember that windows and x86 was relevant at one point. not that i'm ruling out the possibility of MS porting windows to this chip: if they want to, that's great: they'll just have to bear in mind that there will be no DRM so they won't be able to lock everyone out.
If you want to run x86 binaries, use a dynamic translation tool.
who was it.... i think it was ICT who put 200 special instructions into the Loongson 2H, which allow it to accelerate-emulate the most common x86 instructions, they got 70% of the main processor speed.
If this processor is going to be designed and licensed under GPLv3 - I guess one won't be able to build any license-compatible proprietary software for it either. Curious - but count me out :)
ah interesting. no, it wouldn't be. i believe there are two separate misunderstandings here.
first: i did actually look some time ago at LEONv..... v2 i think it is, which is LGPL licensed i think by Gaisler Research but the amount of work needed to turn it into a modern GPU/VPU-competitive processor would be too costly. then there is the stuff on http://opencores.org/ but it's not really ready for prime-time - i've been keeping an eye on the projects there for quite some time [none of them are SMP capable for example]
instead, i kept hunting, spoke to tensilica about their core (which is superb btw!), talked to synopsis about their core (ARC), and even came up with a way to do software-interrupt-driven SMP (yes i ran it by alan cox on LKML!). when this current design popped up, and i saw both its capabilities and that they are willing to respect the GPL regarding the toolchain, i jumped at the chance.
second misunderstanding is over design of *hardware* impacting what *software* it can run. it would be necessary to have a modified version of the GPL, stating "all and any software programs running on this hardware *must* be GPL licensed". the impact that this would have would be extremely problematic, as well as being rather fascist and not in the spirit of free software at all.... and, also, as it would be a modified version of the GPL, it wouldn't *be* the GPL, so could not be FSF-Endorsed.
with that as background, to answer the question directly: this is a proprietary design just like all other proprietary designs, using off-the-shelf completed and *tested* hard macros (including the core processor itself albeit only under the MVP Programme), where there is no restriction of any kind on the software that can be run on that processor, be it free software or proprietary software.
anyone can play, in other words.
i can help address this one, immediately. i'm working on the rhombus-tech project, and am designing a tablet for the KDE "Plasma" Team after they ran into severe reliability issues, GPL violations, unannounced design changes, unnanounced *processor* changes (which of course completely messes things up for them because they have to start again with the porting efforts).
let me start with the phrase "intellectual property" and go from there. intellect -> intelligence; property - > ownership -> enslavement. so the phrase "intellectual property" actually means "intelligence enslavement". the purpose of the phrase "intellectual property" is to enslave anyone who is intelligent. from this perspective we can see what it is *really* used for.
i can definitely attest that intelligence enslavement has been used to adversely affect my right to develop a commercial capitalistic product which is to be sold at profit.
i have contacted *countless* IC suppliers, for audio, camera, wifi, 3G, accelerometer, touchscreen products. the answers have varied from non-existent to "who the hell are you" to intrusive requests for information to "please sign this NDA".
in the end i went, "this is ridiculous. it's as if i'm being treated as some sort of criminal or fraudster (which many suppliers often truly believe that you are). i cannot be bothered with this"
so i created a design which uses an STM32F instead, and i will be programming it to emulate the various functions needed, purely in software, GPLv3 or LGPLv3 licensed. i've had it with these companies who want to "protect" (i.e. enslave) information. audio will be done as Digital PWM using a couple of $0.12 0.5 watt amplifiers: i found the circuits online. camera will be done using 15 pins on the STM32F, emulated entirely in software, the source code *already* exists, google "followingrobot".
ironically this approach will actually *save* money. a company called http://www.icbase.com/ quoted me $2.36 for 10k units of the LQFP-100 mid-end STM32F FOB out of HK (they sell enormous volume). by contrast, an Audio IC costs about $1.50, a Camera IC costs about $1.50, and so on - even just those two ICs alone puts you above the cost of the STM32F.
does that help demonstrate how this is a real problem, not an intellectual exercise?
ok, i don't know if anyone else has spotted this, but there's a link between avogadro's constant, background radiation, and golden mean ratio.
take the background radiation (number of hydrogen atoms per square metre). divide by golden mean ratio cubed. invert. the number, completely coincidentally, comes out to around 6.023e23.
amazing, huh?
a friend of mine just started at portsmouth university, studying marine biology, and we happened to talk about this subject. the situation's actually much worse than being reported here, because the coral reefs are *also* being corroded. given that coral reefs are where the majority of the ocean's life-forms congregate, if that eco-system collapses we're in real serious trouble. i say trouble: the planet's likely to survive, and to re-generate life over the next hundred millenia or so. it's just that humans really won't be around to enjoy being here, that's all.
why is it that:
* the country which uses 50% of the world's resources yet has only 12% of the world's population
* that has not signed the Kyoto Accord and has China being forced into a position of making a "big fuss" so that the USA can "save face" (China's next 10 year plan involves carbon emissions reductions far in excess of the Kyoto Accord)
* that has created more wars and destabilised more countries, broken more international laws and blatantly disregarded sovereignty more than any other country in the history of mankind in the name of "oil" and "profit"
why is that this country, rather than take responsibility for its over-use of resources, comes up with yet *MORE* ways to justify continuing down the path of take, take take.
surely they can see that it's not going end, here, right? surely they can see that even if they subjugated or bombed every other country in the world into submission or non-existence, the resource over-utilisation would, like cancer, just continue to consume more and more and ultimately end up consuming itself.
*surely* they can see that, right? so the question is: what do we - the rest of the world - actually do about this?
yes, sorry - i notice that afterwards, re-reading. apologies!
where's that slashdot article that came up a couple of days ago, about velomobiles being 80x more efficient than electric cars? didn't it have some quite obvious maths that showed that if all cars in the USA were converted to electric, it would require 7,000 GWh of electricity just to charge them every day? what that velomobiles article didn't also cover is that it's highly unlikely that the world has enough lithium and neodymium to go round to supply all those vehicles.
i've *done* the analysis and the designs (http://lkcl.net/ev) and if EVs are to be the success that people really really WANT them to be, then they have to be ultra-efficient (350kg) ultra-streamlined (Cd 0.15) parallel diesel hybrids with a 5kW (7HP) diesel motor and a 10kW (13HP) electric motor running off of a CVT (quadbike) gearbox.
perhaps this is some sort of spiritual test of my patience when people make these kinds of statements "elon musk will be the next steve jobs for recommending that the world's population use more of our planet's natural resources than its humans can actually get hold of", or am i missing something here?
The rebels in this case are committing attrocities left and right, they're flying the flag of Al Queda, they're not our friends, and they're not the enemy of our enemy in a way that makes it valuable to help them out. We have no business being in any of these rebellions from Libya all through the middle east.
That's just insanity and screw you main stream media and leftists and democrats for not screaming bloody murder about it.
ah you've seen "Charlie Wilson's War", then, i take it? remember the analyst's advice? the CIA *funded* the Taliban in a fight against Russian-funded incursions in a black-ops operation that started out with a budget of i think it was $USD5m that ended up around half a BILLION dollars.
the same analyst *also* said, "look - these guys you're funding - the Taliban - yes you're winning the 'war' but you're tearing their country apart to do it. afterwards, you're going to have to help rebuild their infrastructure, otherwise they're going to get PISSED. it's not going to cost much, but you've gotta do it".
so, this guy - charlie - takes the analyst's advice and goes off back to congress, just like he did for the other operations. the film dedicates i think it is about 1 minute to this part of the war. in this scene, the film portrays - against a background of silence devoid of "dramatising music" to get the point home - some unbelievably crass politician basically says, "well we won the war, what are you complaining about, son?"
you might want to think about that before mouthing off about things are going out there, yeah?
Formula 1 all the way down to Formula 3000 uses GPS to get millimetre accuracy. how can they do that, you ask, when the GPS signals are scrambled in the lower bits? well - and this i heard about as far back as 1993 when i was working for Pi Technology - all that is needed is one single low-power GPS transmitter, placed in the centre of the track which *is* accurate. the GPS receivers lock on to that; this gives a concentric ring of millimetre-level accuracy and the remaining GPS satellites can be used to pinpoint the location.
the point is: a powerful enough (or localised) set of transmissions could easily be used to fake the position such that standard GPS receivers would be fooled, thus defeating any GPS-based "security". what's great about that for the terrorists is that any Cruise Missiles or UAVs homing in on their position might also go "huh??" and take a sharp random turn against a cliff. good, eh? mmm....
Tai chi.
Such western thinking.
yes - exactly!
this is about mathematics creating standing waves in the wind that can actually turn it away.
You can't do that without transferring the momentum onto the object doing the "turning away". That's a simple law of conservation of momentum. You have a mass of air going in one direction and then you have the same mass of air going in a different direction. You have to exert force by something to achieve that, standing waves or not. And as per Newton's third law, the structure is still going to be stressed by the dynamic pressure, only in your case, the building will be forced into oscillations. Big win there, that's even "better".
first thing to say is this: sthapatyaveda buildings are built to *millimetre* accuracy. it's a nightmare for the builders, but that's the requirements, so they get told and that's the end of it.
second thing is: think of a pipe organ, closed at one end: that's a "standing-wave" which creates a pure note. now put two of those, back-to-back, where the house is in the centre of the standing wave. now arrange for the airflow to be directed *around* the house instead of "squashing" it. just like jmc23 says in one of the other posts: think "tai chi". you don't *absorb* the power of the attack, you *redirect* it.
this "modern" building company approach is the "brute force" approach: design the building to take a pounding, solid as a rock. that's... dumb. the quantity of materials alone make it hard to justify.
why not take a softer approach? a mathematical one which causes pockets of air? i mean.... for goodness sake: even the fence height surrounding a sthapatyaveda property is in proportion to the dimensions of the house, which is itself built on a grid where certain walls are allowed to be on the grid lines and others are not (usually the internal ones).... and this is all to *millimetre* accuracy.
the property is *literally* tuned, like a precision instrument. i find this approach to be absolutely fascinating yet there are so few people in the world who appreciate it, and quite likely there are *zero* people in the world who actually understand the fundamental principles on which it's all actually based. so unfortunately everyone has to take it "on faith": i don't. i sort-of intuitively get that there's something real going on, at a mathematical level.
think about it, though: these people attribute "desire" to the "weather", but i believe there's a much more rational explanation: the extensive use of golden mean ratio in the proportions of the building setting up resonance patterns in the wind as the brush fire approached, causing pockets of air surrounding the building, against which the general direction of the fire *literally* had no quotes choice quotes but to change direction. i think it will be the same thing with that temple in india - the one that withstood 150mph winds.
I'm still not buying that house, unless it also sharpens dull razor blades and keeps fruit fresh.
:) you can't: they're happy living in it, and are extremely unlikely to sell - ever. i believe you're thinking of pyramids, or perhaps voodoo magic. this is about mathematics creating standing waves in the wind that can actually turn it away. if you've seen "standing waves" on a storm wall, you'll know what this is about. now take that to 3 dimensions: it's the exact same principle.
sthapatyaveda is aslo about making a conscious choice to live a radically healthier lifestyle. it can be tough as hell to make that kind of committment: you can't just take any old house and convert it (you can, but it's nowhere near as effective). you have to pick good land and so on, and do a *complete* from-scratch build. that level of committment from people and the benefits it has on their health, not to mention being extremely proud and happy that they did something like that, it means you're very very unlikely to ever "buy that house".