Re: Intel details future Larrabee graphics chip

On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 18:12:14 +0100, Martin Brown
<|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

So what do you think OS's will look like 10 years from now, when even
home computers run on chips with 100's of cores? Still one gigantic
VMS/Mach/NT descendent running on one CPU, thrashing and piping all
over the place, doing everything, still vulnerable to viruses and
application bugs, still mixing scheduling and virtual memory
management and file systems and running PowerPoint with serial port
interrupts?

A lot of IO is concentrated by the bridge hardware these days. And
serial ports have had moderate to large FIFOs for about a decade.

XP runs quite happily on my dual core. Vista runs less happily on my new
Toshiba portable and I will never recommend using it to anyone.

And those other cores stay idle unless you play a game?

I can see a case for cores allocated to processes with highest demand
for resources, but I do not believe it makes any sense to have one
thread per core with a properly designed secure operating system.

Umm, excuse me, what do those words mean, "properly designed secure
operating system" ?

That's what my wife asked me once when I was stupid enough to use the
phrase "too much garlic."



In exactly the same sense as you claim for your magical hardware
architecture a properly designed secure OS would be well secure.

There's nothing magical about lots of cores. Everybody is doing it.



I could be persuaded that Mickeysoft leave 'Doze vulnerable to avoid
putting the AV people out of business (that would be anti-competitive).


As James says, don't assume malice when incompetance will do.



Things will never change? We'll always use 1980's OS architectures?

Sadly I suspect that might well be the case until some compelling reason
to change comes along. Do you not remember how long the delay was before
there were 32bit consumer grade OS's for the early 386 PCs?

What may well happen is that, once hundred-core CPUs are out in the
wild, some small group of Linix kernal jocks will spin a version that
*can* have file systems, drivers, stacks, and apps assignable to
various CPUs. Then it would just be a configuration thing to assign
one cpu to run just the OS. That would be dynamite for server apps.

Then Microsoft will scramble to catch up, as usual.

John

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Intel details future Larrabee graphics chip
    ... VMS/Mach/NT descendent running on one CPU, ... So what do you do with all those cores? ... Umm, excuse me, what do those words mean, "properly designed secure ... Reducing crashes is actually the easy part. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Intel details future Larrabee graphics chip
    ... VMS/Mach/NT descendent running on one CPU, ... management and file systems and running PowerPoint with serial port ... I can see a case for cores allocated to processes with highest demand for resources, but I do not believe it makes any sense to have one thread per core with a properly designed secure operating system. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • dual-CPU Mac Pro Nehalem can be slower than a single-CPU model for large files
    ... Photoshop is upgraded- test your own system to be sure. ... Dual CPUs are slower than a single CPU! ... "1/2 cores" means that half the CPU cores were disabled ... This finding applies to Photoshop CS4 11.0.1. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: How to develop a random number generation device
    ... chip, and something new will be required to manage them. ... I think that the number of virtual cores will grow faster than the ... One CPU would be the manager, ... all about reliability. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • [RFC PATCH v2 0/2] Saving power by cpu evacuation sched_max_capacity_pct=n
    ... The idea of extending sched_mc_powersavings tunable for cpu evacuation ... can be set to 75 or 50 to evacuate cores ... reduce power consumption. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)