On 12/09/2012 12:32 AM, [email protected] wrote:
Le 2012-12-09 00:13, Ing. Daniel Rozsnyó a écrit :
Currently, you can get a well documented CPU (let's stay at ARM),
even with several cores, there are no hidden things and you can create
the ultimate compiler for it. There is no need to have an opensource
cpu - nobody can benefit from having the possibility to improve on it.
I'm glad you don't need an open CPU.
But following your logic, there is no need of an open GPU either.
There is a plenty of choice in CPUs (intel, amd, lot of ARM
implementation, and others) and they are not the bottleneck. With near
all CPU you get ISA documentation so you can run your code on it. What
else do you want from a CPU than to serve you?
This is not the same in the GPU and peripheral business - there is no
documentation at all, and you can be glad if you find some binary
drivers for your arch/os.
If Intel would hypotetically release its "sources" for their CPUs -
can you manage to make improvements on it and release you own flavor
if their cores? Potentionally not.
believe it or not, even Intel uses 3rd party cores : an ARC (and not ARM)
core is used and tuned to sit idle in the northbridge (and open invisible
ports in your network but i'll leave the security aspect aside).
That is the issue of northbridge, not the CPU itself. Also all the
linux-bios issues were related rather to memory controller
initialization, than to the cpu itself.
_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
