[9fans] non-PC hardware - Plan9

This is a discussion on [9fans] non-PC hardware - Plan9 ; I depressed myself my reading http://plan9.bell-labs.com/wiki/plan...are/index.html from the looks of it, other than x86 there's nothing modern (i.e. 1Ghz+) that runs plan9 do I have this right ? -- matt lawless maht0x0r@xsmail.com -- http://www.fastmail.fm - A fast, anti-spam email service....

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 27

Thread: [9fans] non-PC hardware

  1. [9fans] non-PC hardware

    I depressed myself my reading

    http://plan9.bell-labs.com/wiki/plan...are/index.html

    from the looks of it, other than x86 there's nothing modern (i.e. 1Ghz+)
    that runs plan9

    do I have this right ?
    --
    matt lawless
    maht0x0r@xsmail.com

    --
    http://www.fastmail.fm - A fast, anti-spam email service.


  2. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    Pretty much. Correct me if I'm wrong, but beyond maybe ARM, you're not
    going to have much luck getting 4th ed. running on anything except
    x86. I'm not thrilled either, but I don't currently have the knowledge
    or time to do any porting.

    John

    On 3/27/07, maht wrote:
    > I depressed myself my reading
    >
    > http://plan9.bell-labs.com/wiki/plan...are/index.html
    >
    > from the looks of it, other than x86 there's nothing modern (i.e. 1Ghz+)
    > that runs plan9
    >
    > do I have this right ?
    > --
    > matt lawless
    > maht0x0r@xsmail.com
    >
    > --
    > http://www.fastmail.fm - A fast, anti-spam email service.
    >
    >



    --
    Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

  3. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    arm
    ppc
    x86_64

    not a bad choice, what else would you want to run on?

    thanks

    ron

  4. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    On Tuesday 27 March 2007 14:43:40 ron minnich wrote:
    >... what else would you want to run on?


    Perhaps the cell processor could be interesting.

    On the other hand, you don't have to look to >1GHz processors to have
    something interesting... There are several small devices that would enjoy
    running plan 9

    ---
    izaki



  5. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    On 3/27/07, ron minnich wrote:
    > arm
    > ppc
    > x86_64
    >
    > not a bad choice, what else would you want to run on?
    >
    > thanks
    >
    > ron
    >


    What's the story on Plan 9 on Mac hardware? I just picked up an old
    PowerMac 9600.

    John
    --
    Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

  6. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    where is x86_64?

    - erik

    On Tue Mar 27 16:44:15 EDT 2007, rminnich@gmail.com wrote:
    > arm
    > ppc
    > x86_64
    >
    > not a bad choice, what else would you want to run on?
    >
    > thanks
    >
    > ron


  7. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    I would love to boot Plan9 on my PS3 :-)
    I'm pretty sure it would be straightforward given that a linux
    already exists to show us how to boot under the LV-1 hypervisor.
    What is the state of our PPC64 compiler?

    Paul

    On 27-Mar-07, at 1:54 PM, Lorenzo Fernando Bivens de la Fuente wrote:

    > On Tuesday 27 March 2007 14:43:40 ron minnich wrote:
    >> ... what else would you want to run on?

    >
    > Perhaps the cell processor could be interesting.
    >
    > On the other hand, you don't have to look to >1GHz processors to have
    > something interesting... There are several small devices that would
    > enjoy
    > running plan 9
    >
    > ---
    > izaki
    >
    >


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (Darwin)

    iD8DBQFGCYgWpJeHo/Fbu1wRArOBAKDFxjr/IJtCon9RWF87M38P1jr5tgCg4ciB
    c3DL5JPk3AqwgbyQnnNYsYw=
    =eSmW
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  8. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    On 3/27/07, Paul Lalonde wrote:

    > What is the state of our PPC64 compiler?


    according to my records, you're doing it :-)

    You have a milestone! get busy!

    thanks

    ron

  9. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    :-) I get to add that to my list of projects displaced by real work.
    If I really had my act together I'd download IBM's cell simulator and
    use that to hack at the compiler with. But for now, back at making
    the damned PS3 jump through hoops.

    Paul


    On 27-Mar-07, at 2:57 PM, ron minnich wrote:

    > On 3/27/07, Paul Lalonde wrote:
    >
    >> What is the state of our PPC64 compiler?

    >
    > according to my records, you're doing it :-)
    >
    > You have a milestone! get busy!
    >
    > thanks
    >
    > ron


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (Darwin)

    iD8DBQFGCZVBpJeHo/Fbu1wRAr8kAKC77WYZX5ZaWGJQxJZJf9lyEM4KNgCfaqbH
    eqIkVyLgddOTLuUa6Sk3pyo=
    =Qder
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  10. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    Many processor architectures are in the process of being marginalized or becoming niche architectures. With Apple switching to X86 and Intel just about dropping IA64, the IA32 and IA32/EM64T is the main architecture(s) going forward. Despite having just sold off the X-Scale embedded to Marvel, I expect Intel to get back into the embedded game with ultra low power X86 chips. Alpha is gone, Sparc is Sun only, MIPs might survive as an embedded architecture.

    The big 3 going forward are X86, ARM, and PPC as someone else mentioned.

    There is no doubt that plan9 is both portable and has a good dynamic range, from Bitsy to larger X86 boxes with multiple processors. So I am not depressed at all. Supporting new hardware takes lots of work. I've written more IO drivers in my life than most of you. It's a lot of work.

    Personally if I was going to work on a plan9 porting I would focus on three areas.

    1. The AppleTV box or the Mac Mini. Both of these are low cost machines. Intel actually has an open source driver for the graphics chip on the Mini, which is rare these days, although it doesn't contain source code to do 3D which is too bad. The AppleTV is dirt cheap and you can attach it to a large LCD TV (which are also getting very cheap, soon $1k for 46") and get a really nice setup. I hope the "community" can get some disclosure on the chips used inside the AppleTV box. It would make a nice plan9 terminal.

    Because the new Apple stuff is X86 based, ports shouldn't be too hard, delta chip support.

    2. Xen. Rumor has it that Xen will be built in to Apple's next OS, Leopard. Everyone is using Xen. So it would be nice to have great support for Xen in plan9. From what I read recently, it seems like it's almost there, but not merged into sources yet.

    3. Q: Is there a EM64T version of plan9? If so which word/ptr size model does it use?

    http://www.unix.org/version2/whatsnew/lp64_wp.html

    I think all of the Intel chips going forward are going have EM64T. So plan9 should have good support for that. Plus you get 8 more registers with EM64T, which the architecture could really use.

    leb


    At 9:31 PM +0100 3/27/07, maht wrote:
    >I depressed myself my reading
    >
    >http://plan9.bell-labs.com/wiki/plan...are/index.html
    >
    >from the looks of it, other than x86 there's nothing modern (i.e. 1Ghz+)
    >that runs plan9
    >
    >do I have this right ?
    >--
    > matt lawless
    > maht0x0r@xsmail.com
    >
    >--
    >http://www.fastmail.fm - A fast, anti-spam email service.




  11. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    > Despite having just sold off the X-Scale embedded to Marvel, I expect Intel to get back into the embedded game with ultra low power X86 chips. Alpha is gone, Sparc is Sun only, MIPs might survive as an embedded architecture.

    intel still sells embedded xscale processors. i looked at this a while
    back
    http://www.intel.com/design/network/prodbrf/309430.htm
    kind of looks like a network-cell processor, doesn't it?

    > I think all of the Intel chips going forward are going have EM64T. So plan9 should have good support for that. Plus you get 8 more registers with EM64T, which the architecture could really use.


    i'm not sure what advantage more registers present in modern (amd|intel)/x64
    chips. a value in l1 cache is only 1 cycle away. so i'm not sure what the
    practical difference is between something in a register and something in l1.

    > Because the new Apple stuff is X86 based, ports shouldn't be too hard, delta chip support.


    i'd agree with it not being hard. but that is a considerable amount of
    work. granted, most architechtures are not as bad as the pee cee, but
    one still has to interface with the boot rom, figure out how to find
    and configure memory, set up interrupts, figure out how to talk to
    the bus, how to print "hello, world", etc.

    ignoring the pc, since it's a pig, here's how much code is in each of the
    various ports (my somewhat out-of-date copy):

    bitsy 15240
    ppc 10315
    mtx 7863

    while new ports will be great, you need to be prepared for some heavy
    lifting.

    - erik

  12. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    -->"leb" == Lawrence E Bakst writes:

    leb> Alpha is gone, Sparc is Sun only, MIPs might survive as an
    leb> embedded architecture. The big 3 going forward are X86, ARM, and
    leb> PPC as someone else mentioned.

    MIPS has had somewhat of a resurgence recently, with many domestic
    gateway/router/wifi boxes using, eg. Broadcom MIPS32 SoCs running Linux
    or VxWorks.

    but it's not used as a general-purpose processor any longer. with
    Apple's move to EM64T, you're left with a 1G UltraSPARCiii for $2200, a
    2.5G PPC970 for $3000, or a 1G UltraSPARC T1 for $4000. none of which
    look attractive compared with the prices of an x86(-64)




    d

  13. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 08:06:22PM -0400, erik quanstrom wrote:
    > i'm not sure what advantage more registers present in modern (amd|intel)/x64
    > chips. a value in l1 cache is only 1 cycle away. so i'm not sure what the
    > practical difference is between something in a register and something in l1.


    It is more than 1 cycle away; more like 2-3 and for many
    applications the extra registers do make a big difference.

  14. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    David Arnold a écrit :
    > -->"leb" == Lawrence E Bakst writes:
    >
    > leb> Alpha is gone, Sparc is Sun only, MIPs might survive as an
    > leb> embedded architecture. The big 3 going forward are X86, ARM, and
    > leb> PPC as someone else mentioned.
    >
    > MIPS has had somewhat of a resurgence recently, with many domestic
    > gateway/router/wifi boxes using, eg. Broadcom MIPS32 SoCs running Linux
    > or VxWorks.
    >
    > but it's not used as a general-purpose processor any longer.
    >

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godson



  15. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    >ppc 10315

    that's possibly a little misleading: that includes a private copy of devtls.c (2113 lines),
    and there are at least two different platforms in that one directory

  16. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    On 3/27/07, ron minnich wrote:
    > arm
    > ppc
    > x86_64
    >
    > not a bad choice, what else would you want to run on?
    >
    > thanks
    >
    > ron
    >


    mips

  17. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    On 3/28/07, Iruata Souza wrote:
    > mips


    Dang, can't find it, but there's some startup that's basically
    building huge, single-board MIPS clusters using a mix of newer chips
    for the interconnects and networking to keep latency down, and older
    CPUs to keep heat and expense down.

    Anyone else see this blurb?

    -Jack

  18. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    -->"Jack" == Jack Johnson writes:

    Jack> Dang, can't find it, but there's some startup that's basically
    Jack> building huge, single-board MIPS clusters using a mix of newer
    Jack> chips for the interconnects and networking to keep latency down,
    Jack> and older CPUs to keep heat and expense down.

    Jack> Anyone else see this blurb?

    http://www.movidis.com/ ?

  19. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    > Anyone else see this blurb?

    http://www.sicortex.com/

  20. Re: [9fans] non-PC hardware

    fwiw i've had a 64-bit mips port in the works. it was stalled
    many, many months ago due to the lack of spare cycles i had at the
    time. however i'm really hoping to pick it back up in the next
    coming weeks. most of the toolchain is working and some of the
    kernel parts are there.

    i absolutely do plan on continuing this, so i'll keep 9fans posted
    as soon as i'm back on track with it.

    tim


    > On 3/27/07, ron minnich wrote:
    >> arm
    >> ppc
    >> x86_64
    >>
    >> not a bad choice, what else would you want to run on?
    >>
    >> thanks
    >>
    >> ron
    >>

    >
    > mips



+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast