4 ms·
Here's the real problem: which new processor is likely to be more commercially successful: the one with transparent caching that can benefit all existing softwa
by usefulcat 10y ago
Here's the real problem: which new processor is likely to be more commercially successful: the one with transparent caching that can benefit all existing software without so much as a recompile, or the one with the manually-managed "fast memory" that will only benefit that software which has been specifically tailored to use it?
- restalis 10y agoI conceded in one of my previous comments¹ that "that's how you sell" (being focused in the short term if not on "now"). If, however, one designs an architecture for the long term, then "one boot fits all" should be out of the question, on principle. Of course we have an inertia that will keep things going as they are for some time, but if one thinks about designing something afresh, then the lesson learned from the cache model experiment is not one that should be glossed over. ¹ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12186357 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12186357
- oldmanjay 10y agoYou seem to forget that trying to plan long-term technology trends is folly, because no one gets to be the technology dictator. What you ascribe to inertia is better assigned to evolution.
- corysama 10y agoBut, that's not what this project is about. It's not an either-or situation. There are chips in the wild today that give you the option to move some or all of your cache to manual control if you want to. This project is about giving you the software interface needed for you to get access to the feature those chips already have. I feel I have to point this out not necessarily to usefulcat, but because I see a lot of comments arguing against a false-dichotomy strawman of this project.