5 ms·

a true milestone! hope it is also the beginning of the end - ISA shouldn't be some tightly controlled assets managed by some lawyers and CXOs, companies shouldn

by tw1984 3y ago

a true milestone! hope it is also the beginning of the end - ISA shouldn't be some tightly controlled assets managed by some lawyers and CXOs, companies shouldn't be sued for just trying to invest into certain ecosystems.

snvzz 3y ago
The proprietary ISA ship has long sailed[0]. RISC-V is inevitable[1]. 0. https://riscv.org/members/ https://riscv.org/members/ 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktjSvlelKPk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktjSvlelKPk
- KingLancelot 3y ago
  Microsoft, Intel, AMD, NVIDIA. Only one I didn’t see was Apple, hell even Raspberry Pi is there.
  - Tepix 3y ago
    Apple is also interested, they were hiring a RISC-V engineer back in 2021 already.
    - cmrdporcupine 3y ago
      I can't a realistic scenario see Apple moves off Aarch64 at this point for their MPU. They're having boatloads of success with what they've done there. But I can imagine there's interest on their part in using something like RISC-V in supporting chipsets; modems, power mgmt, disk controllers, etc. That and having something in their backpocket "just in case."
    - ComputerGuru 3y ago
      Apple is the only company with a special licensing deal with ARM that lets them do whatever they want and develop their own ARM cores without relying on ARM IP or premade designs like everyone else. They've also sorted it out financially where they're probably not incurring incremental costs, though I think the details are secret.
      - snvzz 3y ago
        I have seen this statement several times before, but nobody's ever been able to source it.
- zokula 3y ago
  [dead]
pjmlp 3y ago
RISC V is not extension free, and a CPU is meaningless without a, most likely, proprietary board.
- swagmoney1606 3y ago
  Still a step in the right direction.
  - pjmlp 3y ago
    A path already trailed by OpenSPARC and PowerPC.
    - IshKebab 3y ago
      SPARC is dead and Power was only recently opened (probably in response to RISC-V). Neither of them originated from a neutral source.
      - pjmlp 3y ago
        OpenPOWER Foundation exists since 2013. SPARC is quite alive for Solaris customers, and there are still plenty of them. Regardless, it doesn't change the fact that they were there first. Anyone that thinks basic ISA being open source, will prevent extensions, proprietary boards or boot firmware are fooling themselves. Sure, it may do for a couple of maker community projects, Arduino style, and that is about it.
        Pet_Ant 3y ago
        > SPARC is quite alive for Solaris customers Fujitsu has announced plans to transition away from SPARC by 2030. Oracle has laid off their staff, after the M8 in 2017. ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARC https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARC ) If SPARC isn’t dead, then it’s in palliative care, and not far behind Itanium. Shame because SPARC T series was interesting and I wonder what it would look like today at modern geometries and using chiplets.
OhMeadhbh 3y ago
why?
- RetroTechie 3y ago
  As open source options mature & become more plentiful, it simply becomes more 'painful' for companies to ignore / go a closed sourced route. Closed source = extra cost, licensing red tape & so on. However small, it's a bother. Need an OS? Grab open source one. Want that + 'secret sauce'? Grab BSD flavour OS & add your secret sauce. Want OS with custom user interface? Grab open source OS & add custom UI shell. Going closed source for anything where open source does the job, just means extra development effort, or paying 3rd party $$ while (often) not necessary. And eg. $0.05 royalties / device matters when it's a part with $3 production cost. On the hardware side this is a much slower moving train. But same principle.
  - OhMeadhbh 3y ago
    Have you ever used the rocket core generator? There's a reason people pay for ARM tools. There's a reason people pay SiFive and StarFive to use the rocket core generator for them. (heck, there's a reason I still use WDC65C02's in new designs.) While I'm generally a fan of open source software, open source hardware is a different beast. The cost of copying an open source hardware design is noticeably higher than the cost of copying open source software. You always pay for what you get. If you're lucky, you pay in cash.

by tw1984 3y ago

snvzz 3y ago

The proprietary ISA ship has long sailed[0]. RISC-V is inevitable[1]. 0. https://riscv.org/members/ https://riscv.org/members/ 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktjSvlelKPk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktjSvlelKPk

KingLancelot 3y ago
Microsoft, Intel, AMD, NVIDIA. Only one I didn’t see was Apple, hell even Raspberry Pi is there.
- Tepix 3y ago
  Apple is also interested, they were hiring a RISC-V engineer back in 2021 already.
  - cmrdporcupine 3y ago
    I can't a realistic scenario see Apple moves off Aarch64 at this point for their MPU. They're having boatloads of success with what they've done there. But I can imagine there's interest on their part in using something like RISC-V in supporting chipsets; modems, power mgmt, disk controllers, etc. That and having something in their backpocket "just in case."
  - ComputerGuru 3y ago
    Apple is the only company with a special licensing deal with ARM that lets them do whatever they want and develop their own ARM cores without relying on ARM IP or premade designs like everyone else. They've also sorted it out financially where they're probably not incurring incremental costs, though I think the details are secret.
    - snvzz 3y ago
      I have seen this statement several times before, but nobody's ever been able to source it.
zokula 3y ago
[dead]

pjmlp 3y ago

RISC V is not extension free, and a CPU is meaningless without a, most likely, proprietary board.

swagmoney1606 3y ago
Still a step in the right direction.
- pjmlp 3y ago
  A path already trailed by OpenSPARC and PowerPC.
  - IshKebab 3y ago
    SPARC is dead and Power was only recently opened (probably in response to RISC-V). Neither of them originated from a neutral source.
    - pjmlp 3y ago
      OpenPOWER Foundation exists since 2013. SPARC is quite alive for Solaris customers, and there are still plenty of them. Regardless, it doesn't change the fact that they were there first. Anyone that thinks basic ISA being open source, will prevent extensions, proprietary boards or boot firmware are fooling themselves. Sure, it may do for a couple of maker community projects, Arduino style, and that is about it.
      - Pet_Ant 3y ago
        > SPARC is quite alive for Solaris customers Fujitsu has announced plans to transition away from SPARC by 2030. Oracle has laid off their staff, after the M8 in 2017. ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARC https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARC ) If SPARC isn’t dead, then it’s in palliative care, and not far behind Itanium. Shame because SPARC T series was interesting and I wonder what it would look like today at modern geometries and using chiplets.

OhMeadhbh 3y ago

why?

RetroTechie 3y ago
As open source options mature & become more plentiful, it simply becomes more 'painful' for companies to ignore / go a closed sourced route. Closed source = extra cost, licensing red tape & so on. However small, it's a bother. Need an OS? Grab open source one. Want that + 'secret sauce'? Grab BSD flavour OS & add your secret sauce. Want OS with custom user interface? Grab open source OS & add custom UI shell. Going closed source for anything where open source does the job, just means extra development effort, or paying 3rd party $$ while (often) not necessary. And eg. $0.05 royalties / device matters when it's a part with $3 production cost. On the hardware side this is a much slower moving train. But same principle.
- OhMeadhbh 3y ago
  Have you ever used the rocket core generator? There's a reason people pay for ARM tools. There's a reason people pay SiFive and StarFive to use the rocket core generator for them. (heck, there's a reason I still use WDC65C02's in new designs.) While I'm generally a fan of open source software, open source hardware is a different beast. The cost of copying an open source hardware design is noticeably higher than the cost of copying open source software. You always pay for what you get. If you're lucky, you pay in cash.