FR version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
66% Positive
Analyzed from 1874 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#https#itanium#code#qemu#windows#software#com#more#intel#compiler
Discussion (75 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
I’m sure there’s a joke about that being a huge leap in performance for Windows on IA-64 over the past 23 years waiting to be made from this.
VLIW works for single workloads. It works exceptionally well for single workloads with no or explicit cache like DSP. You can trade the footprint and complexity from OoO for a wider execution unit and more SRAM. It works well for HPC, too, for the same reason. But for anything where more than one process exists, it just really doesn’t work, and that’s most modern workload.
Itanium also has a unique set of self inflicted issues due in large part to Intel trying to make a wide variety of cross compatible parts, but IMO even if they’d got it right, it still would have died.
One example was "advanced loads" which allowed you to issue a load as soon as you knew the address, even in the face of potential pointer aliasing in the future, and then later complete the load when you actually hit a data dependency that requires it. https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20150805-00/?p=91...
Another example is "speculative loads" which lets you issue a load before you even know if it's valid, such as unrolling a loop for an array that you don't know if is a multiple of the unrolled loop chunk length (and therefore might trap with a page fault if fully resolved). https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20150804-00/?p=91...
gcc maintained the ia64 target a long time for unclear reasons, but it was also still inefficient on other platforms. The FOSS compiler worked, but that was its only performance metric that counted for many users. =3
Not sure why you think the Intel compilers were a myth, as they are still around working far better than gcc in many use-cases:
"An Overview of the Intel® IA-64 Compiler"
https://webdocs.cs.ualberta.ca/~amaral/courses/605/papers/In...
1. VLIW exposes microarchitectural details, locking them in like an ABI. Updates to the microrachitecture will require changes to the ISA, thereby breaking backwards compatibility with every generation.
2. The dominant programming paradigm is sequential code, often just old C code with heavy pointer aliasing and little compile time extractable parallelism. This reduces static parallelism in the code base and shifts it into a runtime problem. The CPU discovers the dependencies at runtime instead. If you built a programming language that exposes more parallelism (think something like ParaSail), this problem wouldn't be as big as it is for C style programming languages.
Nobody will build a language for architectures that suffer from backwards compatibility problems, so why bother? VLIW is primarily suited for ASIPs and not much else.
It had potential but until you have an easy transition path, few will consider it. Apple figured that out during the 68K > PPC > X86 > ARM transitions.
Apple is an exception as it has always had a walled-garden ecosystem with the OS, so can force shifts in architectures unlike most companies. The M3/M4 Pro series with unified GPUs is probably the best design on the consumer market right now, but people are not leveraging it as much as they would have in other ecosystems.
Have a wonderful day =3
I was working for a large bank and it was all windows, including production. We used to run WebSphere Application Server on Windows. I was looking for a dev server to run unit tests on, including integration tests which required an actual WebSphere instance. The infrastructure team said they had “a box” going spare and it turned out to be IA64 on Windows.
If my memory serves me correctly WebSphere only ran on windows for IA-64 up to 6 and we were running on 7.
I had to do a bit of hacking but I did manage to get it working using the dlls from the 6 version. It was fine for running integration tests and a pretty fast box considering.
Superficially it sounds a little crazy, but it's probably a lot less crazy than far more mainstream antipatterns (e.g. 'lets have our CI download all the dependencies from npm over the internet each time the build runs')!
Did running the unit tests on IA-64 ever flush out genuine issues that were 'working by accident' on x86?
Vibe coded software is the modern equivalent of the shovelware of the 90s.
I don't think so, especially as the latter was attempting to make a profit but this clearly wasn't done with a for-profit motive in mind.
It's bone crushingly dry to try and figure this kind of shit out yourself, can do everything right according to every available reference and code comment only to get compiler and linker errors nobody has ever seen or posted about. Weeks and weeks of smashing your face against a wall until it gives. Now anyone can get twice as far in an evening. And that fuckin rules
Hard to not get a little hyperbolic about it... but I can't wait for everyone to exhaust their meme projects/ports and models to get just a bit better. Feels like we're about to have something of a golden age when everyone starts really making the stuff they've always wanted.
And yet, some folks have come to the battle and have ended up extensively using LLM's to code it. It is wild to see that these things can target such an obscure platform and get some decent results in a very short amount of time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPxhuKTltsk
This is something that doesn't have any real economic value but many are more than happy to see happen.
It booted Linux fine, was working on booting IPF EFI firmware when I got distracted by life and other projects.
It’s the product of companies bent on doing all the wrong things.
Taking for granted that hardware backcompat (Itanium had this, too!) was a starting requirement…
Even the 800lb guerilla Intel had to acknowledge amd64 was the next step, or it could end up a niche use chip like PowerPC.
The moral of the story is usability matters with consumer chip architecture. =3
EDIT: It looks like it might be this one: https://github.com/syunnPC/qemu-system-ia64
[1] https://github.com/pvaibhav/qemu-ia64
[2] https://github.com/XVilka/qemu-ia64/branches/all
Key relevant quote:
> In 1994, Intel and HP looked around and saw a wide variety of successful server CPU architectures like Alpha, MIPS, SPARC, and POWER. This annoyed them and they decided to make a new CPU that no one would want to use.