Is it time for open processors?
1–10 of 236 posts
Re: Is it time for open processors?
#2Past time, but progress on the riscv front is amazing. If prototype-scale fab got cheaper I expect we'd see a wave of parts focused on security and auditablity in short order.
Re: Is it time for open processors?
#3Past time, but progress on the riscv front is amazing. If prototype-scale fab got cheaper I expect we'd see a wave of parts focused on security and auditablity in short order.
If one kind of RISC-V chips would become the go-to CPU for small smart appliances, demand could rise enough for a fab to pick up mass production.
Re: Is it time for open processors?
#4Friend of mine went to Hong Kong (from Europe) to work on exactly this: http://libresilicon.com/
Re: Is it time for open processors?
#5If we see further fragmentation of cpu architectures it's not going to be fun for users and developers. Already the fragmentation of OS makes that cross platform is a big challenge. It would make the equivalent of a .net/java/webassembly/posix critical.
Re: Is it time for open processors?
#6If we see further fragmentation of cpu architectures it's not going to be fun for users and developers. Already the fragmentation of OS makes that cross platform is a big challenge. It would make the equivalent of a .net/java/webassembly/posix critical.
Perhaps the solution is some form of interoperability across processors. Where they primarily run one ISA but have a dynamic converter that can based on some flag interpret memory as code from a different ISA? As chip fabbers and ISAs compete eventually a clear winner emerges and these compatibility layers are mere curiosities just like 16-bit mode on modern x86 CPUs.
Except wait, maybe this is just my cynicism talking, but I have a feeling intel has the resources to just plough forward with x86 and prevent any competition from gaining a foothold in the markets where they hold dominance (laptop, desktop, server). ARM continues to dominate mobile and perhaps some small portion of servers. POWER and SPARC stay in their little niches. Perhaps RISC-V makes its way into a couple of embedded appliances. And that's it, for the foreseeable future.
Re: Is it time for open processors?
#7Past time, but progress on the riscv front is amazing. If prototype-scale fab got cheaper I expect we'd see a wave of parts focused on security and auditablity in short order.
If one kind of RISC-V chips would become the go-to CPU for small smart appliances, demand could rise enough for a fab to pick up mass production.
The problem isn't that you can't fab for mass production, it's that development costs are very high to get there. Working on an fpga only gets you so far.
Re: Is it time for open processors?
#8If we see further fragmentation of cpu architectures it's not going to be fun for users and developers. Already the fragmentation of OS makes that cross platform is a big challenge. It would make the equivalent of a .net/java/webassembly/posix critical.
It is generally much harder to target a another OS than to target a another CPU architecture.
Re: Is it time for open processors?
#9If we see further fragmentation of cpu architectures it's not going to be fun for users and developers. Already the fragmentation of OS makes that cross platform is a big challenge. It would make the equivalent of a .net/java/webassembly/posix critical.
Almost all code today is written in languages that run in vms(java, .net), are interpreted (python, ruby, js), or easily compile across cpu architectures. Operating systems are a different story but changing the underlying ISA is really not a huge deal
IME it’s harder to port to a new os than a new ISA.
Re: Is it time for open processors?
#10Open does not mean better. This is not how our world works. Would be nice to have but I assume every Intel chip I can buy (even with the throtteling) will be more powerful and cheaper than any open processors. There is also much more than only architecture this thing (this works in software but not in hardware)... this would only work if a big player like AMD or Intel jumps on this ship (but it would be like giving away intellectual property).