If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite
I must admit I'm not too sure about RISC-V. A completely free ISA sounds nice in theory, but doesn't it mean that each chip manufacturer will be able to add its own proprietary modifications, the result being the same mess we've seen with the Unices? I'm afraid the industry's obsession with customer lock-in must not be underestimated.
A completely free ISA sounds nice in theory, but doesn't it mean that each chip manufacturer will be able to add its own proprietary modifications, the result being the same mess we've seen with the Unices? I'm afraid the industry's obsession with customer lock-in must not be underestimated.
True. But we already have multiple proprietary architectures, so nothing new there. And all the multiple versions of ARM have done nothing to slow the widespread adoption of that architecture—in fact, they have probably contributed to it.
The neat thing is that having a common open-source compiler collection like GCC that will compile the same code to all of them helps reduce the lock-in considerably. And where GCC goes, Linux follows. So you have a whole ready-made OS and application stack, that can be booted up on the new architecture with comparatively little work.
So I think this means that the only vendor/product-specific features that will survive are those that contribute genuine value, not those that simply offer a poor excuse for making code harder to port.
Comment