23 ms·

Ask HN: Does anyone care about OpenPOWER?

75 points by sandwichbop 3y ago

I see a lot of energy around RISC-V but I never see anything similar for OpenPOWER, on paper it seems like the dream machine with actual performance like the Talos Workstations albeit a bit expensive but this sounds incredible https://www.raptorcs.com/content/TL2PA1/intro.html >Designed with a fully owner-controlled CPU domain, you can audit and modify any portion of the open source firmware on the Talos™ II mainboard, all the way down to the CPU microcode. is there something I'm missing? why does no one seem to care about OpenPOWER

h2odragon 3y ago
$6,804.74 for that system. This is for people who want IBM + total auditability? Who have severe commitments to the ecosystem already?
- sandwichbop 3y ago
  it is expensive, as far as I understand it (I'm still just learning about it all), it is for those need total auditability, they mention EU a lot but also this seems catered to actual individuals who really want a truly open system that doesn't scarifice performance (RISC-V seems great for embedded but is still not there for high end workflows). To me, this sounds like a reasonable price for what they're providing but I understand it's definitely outside the price point of many but I must wonder if there's anything more besides price, is it really just that they're too expensive and this is why there's so little talk about it?
  - h2odragon 3y ago
    I have vague memories of PPC instructions sucking compared to alpha, sparc, and x86, 20 years or more ago. I've got no specific memories what my objection was; but I recall dropping my plans to support it as a platform after a very quick look at it. Perhaps it didn't have atomics at that point? That would've killed it for that project.
wmf 3y ago
It's crazy expensive, Raptor torched their own roadmap, and no one actually needs what they're selling. (People say they do, but 99% of those people haven't actually bought it.)
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
  > Raptor torched their own roadmap I don't think that's a fair summary; Raptor has a very specific product, more or less the selling point of which is 100% open and auditable systems, so when IBM came out with POWER10 that bakes blobs into the system they're stuck with completely switching course. That's not torching anything, it's them being forced to correct for external factors.
  - brucehoult 3y ago
    But they're free to design and build their own chips without such blobs, right? Right? <insert Padme meme>
    - yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
      I'm not sure I follow your point. They're a vendor using POWER chips to provide blob-free computers. I'm fairly confident that they could make their own chips, but given that they'd need a fab and call it a billion dollars that's an impractical step up from building machines around existing chips. None of this constitutes them having "torched their own roadmap", just being stuck between a rock (their product being decent performance blob-free computers) and a hard place (needing to source CPUs).
      - brucehoult 3y ago
        When someone says "build their own chip" they do not in general mean to extract their own silicon ingots from sand, or to build their own fab. They mean to "tape out" their own SoC design and send it to a fab owner such as TSMC, Samsung, Intel for the physical manufacturing step. Apple does not own a fab. Arm does not own a fab. Qualcomm does not own a fab. I believe IBM does not own any modern fab (some built in early 2000s, yes).
ensignavenger 3y ago
There are some people who care, otherwise it wouldn't even be a thing... but as you say, it doesn't get a lot of attention. I think it would be interesting to hear why? Why do companies implementing RISC-V and actively working on developing it not choose OpenPOWER instead? For that matter, OpenSPARC? I am not well enough versed in instruction sets to really comment, but I would love to hear more from anyone in the know? Perhaps it is because IBM and Oracle exercise too much control over their architectures making it hard for a community to develop around them? Perhaps it is something in the licensing? Perhaps more fundamental problems with the design of the other instruction sets, making RISC-V easier a better base to improve on?
- ensignavenger 3y ago
  I did some looking, and it appears that OpenSparc is copyleft (GPLv2) which, combined with Oracle Yuck, may be a huge reason it is held back from wider interest. However, OpenPower stuff seems to all be Apache licensed from their repos. I could not find the RISC-V license, but it appears to be extremely liberal as well.
  - _chu1 3y ago
    OpenSPARC is apparently used as a base for the Elbrus CPU line in Russia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbrus-8S https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbrus-8S That specific chip I linked to the article about has the ability to run x86 code via translation and they claim it can run Windows. Guess that solves the chicken and egg issue, but the biggest problem is who would be willing to fab it for them, sad that politics and war interrupted this.
    - ensignavenger 3y ago
      Interesting! The article says windows XP and 7, which are pretty old and unsupported now. But it is a very interesting approach.
    - devl547 3y ago
      Elbrus are VLIW/EPIC, based on home-grown architecture. The SPARC-based one is the old MCST R1000. >who would be willing to fab it Before the conflict, they used TSMC. Now, AFAIK, the only fab available is Mikron, located in Zelenograd near Moscow. And only 90nm process. There were some rumors about switching to SMIC, but I have not heard any updates for quite some time.
dilippkumar 3y ago
IBM is currently shipping Power10 while Raptor ships Power9 in the Talos II. If I understand correctly, they had issues getting to a fully open source firmware solution for a Talos III with a Power10 in it. This actually made me hold off on spending $10k on a computer that's last-generation technology. I suspect I'm not alone - a lot of interest in OpenPOWER is probably waiting for Power11 and Talos III or whatever permutation that can ship a real product that isn't 5+ years old.
- _chu1 3y ago
  They ended up going with a different platform that's still newer than Power9. It's even bi-endian. https://www.talospace.com/2023/10/the-next-raptor-openpower-systems-are.html https://www.talospace.com/2023/10/the-next-raptor-openpower-...
- sillywalk 3y ago
  I believe it was the memory controller that needed a binary blob.[0] [ The next Raptor OpenPOWER systems are coming, but they won't be Power10 ] ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37963941 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37963941 ) [0] [ In the future even your RAM will have firmware; and the subject of POWER10 blobs ] ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26029798 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26029798 )
chasil 3y ago
I think that POWER in gaming was drowned by AMD, and ARM suffocated it everywhere else. Apple dumped it because the G5 was not going to work in a laptop, and if it couldn't beat x86 in that space, then the M1 has closed that door forever. The Cell was an innovative design, but an AMD core and an ATI GPU on the same die was an onslaught that IBM wasn't going to survive. ARM has been the top supercomputer, and it runs in tiny things. The pervasiveness that it has came at the expense of architectures that were not as flexible.
kanzure 3y ago
Here is a group that cares about OpenPOWER: https://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/silicon-salon/libre-soc/ https://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/silicon-salon/libre-soc/
kkfx 3y ago
I do care about big iron, about open hardware, but... I do not have the financial firepower to help developing a computer architecture, and buying expensive iron with limited software support is not much interesting. At least if some major distro do support OpenPower as a tier-1 arch, meaning almost all packages are there, updated at the same speed (almost, at least) of amd64 well... I can buy a classic workstation and making that a main personal desktop. I can't do much more otherwise... PS while I prize and want open hardware I really doubt it can really be auditable at hw level, at least for most owners, even if technically well skilled. Projects of a certain size can be known only if they are FLOSS from the first SLoC in a way a spread community born around them, knowing them from the start and passing knowledge.
- frabre 3y ago
  The software support is good. I use it and don't lack for pre-built packages or updates. For example, it's supported by Ubuntu Pro.
nyrikki 3y ago
Hardware Decimal floating point is very useful, both for legacy and new financial systems and some numerical problems you need improved stability on.
- bear8642 3y ago
  Although frustratingly loosing support with the new open xlc compiler!
- RustyRussell 3y ago
  Dropped in the latest Power chips I believe. I had a friend who worked on it: he called it simply "decimal floating" because there was no point :)
snovymgodym 3y ago
The Talos stuff is cool but it's priced way too high for anyone who isn't taking a business expense tax deduction for it. Especially post 2020, the pricing for their products has gone way up. It's what, $6000 for the 4-core, 8GB memory entry level model? I know it isn't that insane considering what new and used POWER servers cost, but also is anyone using these who isn't locked into AIX or IBM i? Is there any real reason to use POWER when priced against commodity AMD64 machines?
- sillywalk 3y ago
  I don't think you can run (legally) Aix on Talos. And I doubt you could run 'i' as it needs special firmware support.
  - snovymgodym 3y ago
    I'm aware, I was more asking if anyone is invested in the ecosystem for reasons other than being locked into proprietary IBM operating systems.
- frabre 3y ago
  If you're used to building your PCs, you can build an 8-core workstation with a bunch more RAM for about $4000. While it's about double what you might spend on a similarly capable commodity desktop, you're getting a Libre boot process, fewer blobs, and a different class of chips.
_chu1 3y ago
If a company is serious about making POWER based SBCs or motherboards that are affordable yet fast enough for enthusiasts (no ECC, commonly used components), there would be a lot more interest. The price is what would make me turn away from POWER, as much as I love it and the ability for it to be based on completely open hardware. Someone with a lot of new ideas and a lot of energy doing something crazy like x86 binary translation or a Cell-styled CPU would also bring more attention to the platform. RISC-V built a lot of traction very fast and was affordable and is now starting to be competitive with ARM, so it has different circumstances around it. There's a group developing a POWER based laptop with a quad-core NXP processor, I've been watching them since 2020 and they've made some pretty good progress. It even has an MXM3 slot for adding a dedicated video card. https://www.powerpc-notebook.org/en/ https://www.powerpc-notebook.org/en/
- weare138 3y ago
  This was definitely the problem. I was interested in OpenPOWER when it came out but there were almost no vendors in the space. Expensive Talos and IBM workstations and a handful of dev boards were pretty much it.
- duskwuff 3y ago
  > There's a group developing a POWER based laptop with a quad-core NXP processor What I've seen from that project in the past does not fill me with confidence, and nothing I've seen since has changed that impression. Even if the project results in working hardware (which is uncertain), its performance is unlikely to be on par with expectations. Previous discussions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23988511 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23988511 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28578021 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28578021
  - _chu1 3y ago
    I have felt the same way about it a bit, and I do think they need to change a few things if they plan to get anywhere with it. I do hope though that they're able to succeed, they aren't stuck with that design forever and what they learned could be applied to a successor model. They should really consider partnering or merging with Raptor Computing, the last thing the scarce POWER market needs is more fragmentation.
E39M5S62 3y ago
It's simply too expensive. People that want to play around with a non-x86_64 system can buy one of a thousand different ARM devices and get all sorts of software running on it. If you want POWER, you're buying old datacenter gear with all the downsides of that class of hardware - or you're buying a Raptor system where the price has skyrocketed in recent years for aging hardware. I pre-ordered a Blackbird motherboard and 32 thread CPU and got it in 2019. I used it as my main workstation until 2022 and then decided I'd had enough fighting the software ecosystem. I still have the machine because I've regretted selling other odd hardware in the past ... especially my dual 133mhz BeBox.
- johnklos 3y ago
  This. There are no inexpensive Power SBCs like we have for ARM and RISC-V. Heck, even MIPS has ways to buy and run inexpensively (I run NetBSD on Ubiquiti Edgerouter hardware, for instance). If we could have a low end, quad core 2 GHz Power SBC with 4 gigs for $80 and a microATX motherboard with 16 cores at, say, around 4.5 GHz for under $500, the ecosystem would be VASTLY different. Right now, all of my PowerPC work is on an old 1.5 GHz PowerPC G4 Mac mini and on an even older first generation iMac upgraded with a 600 MHz PowerPC G3. It'd be nice to have new hardware that didn't cost more than a decked out Ryzen 7950X3D system.
  - KerrAvon 3y ago
    I would completely seriously buy that hypothetical POWER SBC immediately.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
- alfalfasprout 3y ago
  This. And that extends to the datacenter too. So, why spend all the time improving compiler outputs for a platform that doesn't have that much traction or perceived potential?
- 3y ago
SpecialistK 3y ago
I suspect IBM opened up the ISA (and some hardware designs) because they were quickly losing market relevance. Apple and gaming have moved on, new projects will use Arm or RISC-V, so the only markets I can think of are: * automotive and other legacy embedded applications * data centers with existing POWER applications * niche workstations like the Talos I do enjoy alternative ISAs, so I'd love to be wrong on this.
- _chu1 3y ago
  Gaming still may be interested if there's compelling enough options to get a leg up over the competition. The PS4/XBONE and PS5/XSX were both identical hardware, but that's starting to drift away with the PS5 Pro and the recently leaked portable Xbox. Who knows, x86 performance may hit another dead end for a while like it did the early 2010s and ARM may not fit their performance profile. I would mention Nintendo but sadly I don't see them making another non-portable console.
  - SpecialistK 3y ago
    I won't deny that it's possible, but I think it's unlikely. The introduction of AMD SoCs like the Steam Deck and Z1 suggest that a portable Xbox is possible with much less overhead than switching ISA (again) I'm not even sure if the performance race is going to endure - Sony continues to hold the home console crown, Nintendo prints money with their hugely outdated Switch, and Microsoft appear to be pivoting to publishing more than a console exclusivity race they will probably never win ("going Sega") As you said, the future of x86 isn't guaranteed, but if I were calling shots I'd look at Arm designs with embedded graphics like Exynos and Snapdragon before trying to build a fully custom design based on POWER and graphics from elsewhere (probably still AMD, and that single-source has been compelling enough to adopt even while the CPU performance was lackluster)
    - _chu1 3y ago
      I think a relatively substantial issue with swapping ISA is the software library, which is what's kept Intel in business all these years. Older/retro games is a large part of gaming, and being able to play 15+ year old PC games easily with a single download and no kajoogling is a major 1-up for the Steam Deck, especially when some games have better compatibility under Wine than Windows 11. The Xbox Series consoles are capable of playing a select portion OG Xbox and Xbox 360 games almost natively, while presumably playing Xbox 360 games via an emulator, but they stopped adding new games to their backwards compatibility program for some god unknown reason despite the fact they were some of the best selling on the platform, but to me it seems like Microsoft wants to shift literally everything to the cloud, starting from Xbox and eventually getting to Windows somewhere down the line, which scares me honestly. Sun said the network is the computer, but I'm sure they meant a network you controlled, not goddamn Microsoft.
phendrenad2 3y ago
OpenPOWER has no advantages over RISC-V. The performance is going to be the same given the same level of investment into the silicon design. These are just ISAs, and a lot more goes into CPU design to make them fast.
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
  It's possible that OpenPOWER has no advantages today, but I remain curious how we got here; my understanding is that POWER and SPARC both had open source versions before RISC-V was created, so why didn't those get picked up but RISC-V did?
  - ilc 3y ago
    SPARC is a neat ISA, but the concept at the core: register windows, did not take off. OpenPOWER: It may have to do with the size of the ISA when it started to be open. RISC-V, when announced was a small ISA. That means making chips is easier. It could just be the new hawtness effect. Look at how many people use NoSQL when SQL would work just fine ;).
    - brucehoult 3y ago
      > RISC-V, when announced was a small ISA It still is today, comparatively. RV32I/RV64I are very very small ISAs. RV64G is pretty small -- comparable to, say, MC68010, and a lot simpler than i386. These small subsets will be supported by the ecosystem forever, for those who want to use them. They will also remain, unchanged, at the heart of more complex standards such as RVA23 and successors, and make up most of the instructions in programs.
  - Findecanor 3y ago
    RISC-V's success has been mostly in small embedded systems — where a POWER chip would be overkill or unsuitable. The core ISA is very small, thus cheap, and then extensible. The design even encourages proprietary extensions. Then it has grown from there as ISA extensions have been ratified.
- 3y ago
MassPikeMike 3y ago
One very interesting project built on OpenPOWER, but with unique vector extensions, is LibreSOC, https://libre-soc.org/ https://libre-soc.org/. It promises to be fully open hardware as well.
- brucehoult 3y ago
  I have very low confidence that it will ever be anything but vapour, given the project leader's previous record e.g. this project fully funded in August 2016 and not yet delivered 7 1/2 years later. https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68/micro-desktop https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68/micro-desktop The project updates (last one in 2020) are painful to read. A competent outfit such as Pine64 or Sipeed can knock a project like this out in 6 months. They could have been subcontracted given the $234k raised.
  - snvzz 3y ago
    Before the micro-desktop, that person was also involved in some KDE/Plasma tablet, which also never shipped.
MisterTea 3y ago
> is there something I'm missing? Affordable, mature hardware. The Talos systems are starting at 3k for a quad core CPU on a micro ATX board. Same thing happened to MIPS and Sparc. Performance and technical merit mean nothing vs cheap and ubiquitous hardware. It's a lot of cash for a what amounts to an experimental toy. They are also a bit finicky as a friend bought one from another dev that refuses to post for unknown reasons. So there is risk involved too, no one else is making these boards. The performance gaps and architectural features that made these chips matter 20 years ago have been closed by commodity off the shelf x86 hardware and various Arm CPU's are eating everything. The only reason Risc-V matters is that no one has to pay for licenses.
- Pet_Ant 3y ago
  > The only reason Risc-V matters is that no one has to pay for licenses. Well it’s also a clean design that learns from the past 30 users and has got some traction with lota of material available and a rapidly growing ecosystem.
  - inkyoto 3y ago
    For the sake of my own curiosity, what is unclean about or in the POWER ISA?
russell_h 3y ago
I always assumed that Google was putting just enough money into OpenPOWER to keep the vendors interested, as a means of gaining leverage when negotiating with Intel. I haven't kept up, but competition from AMD, ARM and RISC-V all probably fit that need now.
treffer 3y ago
OpenPOWER happened a few years after Apple finished the transition to Intel. The whole architecture is niche since then. Linus Torvalds has a very interesting POV why x86 won. "Develop at home" issues. You are going to deploy to a system that is similar to what you built on. If you run x86 then you'll deploy to x86. And he points to that as the reason for x86 servers. Home is today a x86 or arm computer (arm if you like Apple), perhaps some SBCs (usually arm, perhaps some mips), and some IOT (often esps, so xtensa / risc-v) plus some router/wifi device (arm). RISC-V is scaling up on that axis. It is killing other ecosystems for embedded/iot. It's becoming useful for SBCs and low end desktop boards are on the horizon. That's the scaling path that works. You are $20 away from trying it out. And it can scale all the way to an affordable desktop soon (Milk-V). It's IMHO not "a lot of energy on RISC-V", it's a quickly growing user base. OpenPOWER lost that.
- bluedino 3y ago
  Today we deploy to the cloud and work on Arm/x86 Do most web developers do things that have issues being cross platform?
  - api 3y ago
    Even modern C and C++ code generally ports just fine as long as you avoid things with unspecified behavior like exotic casts and weird pointer tricks. Have to watch endianness too but that doesn’t actually come up all that often. Also AFAIK there are no longer any big-endian architectures in common use. Newer languages are even easier. Rust and Go almost always port with zero issues. Obviously the same goes for scripting and VM based languages like Java. The architecture matters less than it used to.
    - cameron_b 3y ago
      If you’re higher up the stack, sure. If you want performance, you want to keep the dev/prod environment alike so that you can properly optimize
      - 3y ago
sianaa 3y ago
[dead]
sianaa 3y ago
[dead]
jbirer 3y ago
I did, until RISC-V started emerging.
genmud 3y ago
Nobody cares about it because unless you use IBM, or use it in some embedded use cases it’s irrelevant. It’s irrelevant because while they would openly license it, it wasn’t open source as you think about it traditionally and would require you to cross license derived technology to the consortium, which was effectively Freescale and IBM if I recall correctly. IIRC they have only recently open sourced and freely licensed the ISA. Even then, there isn’t much interest in it outside big iron or niche platforms.
rurban 3y ago
The ones, who should care to avoid US backdoors, built their own CPU's instead. And then came RISC-V
awilfox 3y ago
I care deeply, and was one of the early adopters of the Talos. I do my graphics and design work on an iMac G5, still. Power is the hill I'm willing to die on, technologically speaking. The bi-endianness matters a lot to me. I prefer to do my development on BE, and I get hardware accelerated LE VMs for free on Power. But the rest of this thread is correct: right now it is a huge cost sink. I recommend people buy Apple Silicon Macs for new hardware unless they really need the owner controlled firmware of a Talos. There's just no denying the M2/M3 spank the Power9 core in every bench, single and multi thread. I'm eternally optimistic - I was told I was crazy in the dark days of P7 and P8, then the Talos came. Maybe the LibreSoC or PPC Notebook projects deliver? Maybe Talos 3 isn't stupid high cost? I hope, but I don't hold my breath.
NikkiA 3y ago
I'd prefer to buy a theoretical open-source R8000-R12000 based board*, but the only 'open source MIPS' stuff I ever see are low end R4000 and R5000 microcontrollers. * Yours sincerely one of the few people that isn't offended by delay slots. edit: and yes, Loongson is on my radar, has been for a while, but again only ever see microcontrollers rather than general purpose computing motherboards. another edit: looks like loongson-3 3A5000 and 7A2000 boards and mini-PCs are starting to become reasonably affordable, so my dream may be reality in the nearish future.
rcbdev 3y ago
There's a group of Italians who are well on their way to release a commercial Open Hardware PowerPC notebook, for all that's worth: https://www.powerpc-notebook.org/de/ https://www.powerpc-notebook.org/de/
RustyRussell 3y ago
Despite the brilliant work by some IBM engineers (much from my ex-colleagues at OzLabs) there was no strategy to get commodity Open power. Even opening up was more a "throw over the wall" rather than a sustained effort. Developing a proper Linux little-endian ABI was a major engineering feat, across kernel and toolchain, but nobody understood what to do with it.
lupire 3y ago
History of the world. Massive ecosystem gets better overall results than any niche alternative that might be technically superior in some dimension.
frabre 3y ago
I care! And I know a lot of people who care, but we are still a niche sized group. I care mainly because of Raptor Computing Systems offerings, which I think are the main (only?) OpenPOWER systems available. I use a Blackbird, and I'm happy with it. From my own point of view, I'm willing to spend a $$$$ premium on hardware where I can have assurances that from the time I boot it, only code I authorize to run is run. Where every part of the system has code that, at least in principle, I or someone else could audit and fix. People have valuable IP stored on computers and it's worth much more than a few thousand dollars. If you just look at price to performance, you are missing the point. Also, the price is not out of line with other niche desktops such as Apple's or System76. There's not a lot of competition in this niche. The previous system that was useful was a ASUS KGPE-D16 motherboard, which could be librebooted (https://libreboot.org/docs/hardware/kgpe-d16.html https://libreboot.org/docs/hardware/kgpe-d16.html) I expect something new to come along in this space every 5-10 years. For my purposes, I haven't fought with the software ecosystem, and was able to compile the very few packages that weren't already precompiled. Here are some developments I think are worth noting: * There is a libre driver for the onboard NIC. (https://github.com/meklort/bcm5719-fw https://github.com/meklort/bcm5719-fw) This seems to be the only project that cares about blobs in every part of the board. * Dasharo https://www.dasharo.com/ https://www.dasharo.com/ providing alternative boot firmware. * Artic Tern, (https://www.raptorcs.com/content/AT1PC2/intro.html https://www.raptorcs.com/content/AT1PC2/intro.html) which is objectively still mostly a development platform (that if you're skilled you can get to work) provides a completely libre boot environment and the possibility of controlling other peripherals using only auditable code. A few things have not yet made it onto the board: * Flexver (https://www.raptorengineering.com/TALOS/documentation/flexver_intro.pdf https://www.raptorengineering.com/TALOS/documentation/flexve...) which would allow for verifying and auditing hardware, firmware and the boot process isn't commercially available yet. * Ultravisor state enabling more secure VMs is still awaiting implementation AFAIK. (https://wiki.raptorcs.com/wiki/Power_ISA/Privilege_States#Ultravisor_State https://wiki.raptorcs.com/wiki/Power_ISA/Privilege_States#Ul...) * I'm not aware of a lot of hardware that would take advantage of IBM CAPI 2.0 IO accelleration. Perhaps someone has some information on this. * I'm not sure what the status of transactional memory is, but I'm not aware of it being used in software. Perhaps someone can enlighten me on this. These would be nice to have, and I hope to have them in the future. The bottom line is that this is the only hardware currently in production that is going in the direction promised by the personal computing revolution back in the 1970s and 80s and is still capable of handling most people's current general computing needs. I write this hoping that other people like me who are reading this understand the importance of keeping hardware like this alive.
moody__ 3y ago
I really wanted to. I was working on getting a POWER64 port of 9front going, so far I have most of userspace compiling and linking but nothing for a kernel. A friend of mine had a Raptor Talos 2 that was having some issues that he sent over to me to try to use. I did a bunch of debugging of it and concluded there must be some issue with the motherboard. I have tried to contact Raptor some number of times to see what it would cost/take to get this machines repaired but have heard nothing. I've tried their irc channels and support tickets ... nothing back. This experience didn't make me confident in spending the money on a new machine. In the meantime I have tried to do some work with QEMU but I ran in to some snag in understanding exactly how "hypervisor" mode works according to the POWER9 manual. It has some confusing conditions about hypervisor mode and managing the page table, I had tried to join the IBM mailing list for openpower and had asked to see if someone could explain how the hypervisor mode worked more comprehensively, but got nothing back. Of course there really isn't a wealth of information to help me figure this out the otherwise. I say this because both of these were symptoms of the same problem. POWER is really not hobbyist friendly, both in investment cost and in support. There just isn't enough of an ecosystem in my experience.

danielheath 3y ago

There are _so many_ deploy issues surfaced by eg developing on a mac and deploying to linux/aarch64 (or, in my case, developing on x86 linux). Anytime you add a dependency on a package with a native component you're likely to have something to fix.

sandwichbop 3y ago
>The bottom line is that this is the only hardware currently in production that is going in the direction promised by the personal computing revolution back in the 1970s and 80s and is still capable of handling most people's current general computing needs. I write this hoping that other people like me who are reading this understand the importance of keeping hardware like this alive. this is what I believe as well, too many people on HN seem to be lose grasp of the big picture in favor of a few dollars today. (but the big picture can only go so far i.e. Keynes's "In the long run we are all dead"). BUT the big issue that I fear many people are overlooking is the post-PC era. I made a thread on g the other day but didn't get much traction there https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-PC_era https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-PC_era I believe home computing will become more expensive and progress slows down as traditional businesses and "gamers" that currently fuel that affordability dry up and economies of scale inverts. Things like Talos and OpenPOWER will remain more stable in my opinion as they already priced in these niche market demands unlike other archs that seem to depend on a big net of users that every day is growing smaller as people migrate to cloud only solutions. I think it's advantageous to invest into OpenPOWER as an eccosystem even if RISC-V picks up since there's already big dollars behind it that doesn't depend on scraping the bottom of the barrel for funding. I plan to write this up with actual numbers some other day, maybe estimate a sort of timeline when this might start happening
- frabre 3y ago
  Interesting take! I hadn't considered that there could be an inversion where suddenly desktops are no longer commodity products. It got me thinking--something similar happened to digital cameras where all the cheap point and shoots were replaced by phones so that now standalone cameras are an expensive niche for photographers. OpenPOWER piggybacks off of IBM's high end POWER offerings, which are themselves part of a big enterprise market for scientific and financial computing. The OpenPOWER derivatives use IBM's POWER 8/9 chips. I started looking for an alternative to commodity desktops when news came out that there were ring 0/-1/-2/-3 vulnerabilities in chips and I realized I had no idea what code was running on my computer. A lot of people just applied the mitigations and shrugged like it was perfectly normal that they couldn't really control their own computers. When Raptor came out with their offerings, I thought it was great: full ownership of my computer, and as an added bonus some premium IBM chips from another architecture. I know people who spend more than I spent just on graphics cards every year.
  - simne 3y ago
    > I know people who spend more than I spent just on graphics cards every year Could you make any assumption, how many such people exists? If this number enough to achieve some financial sustainability for manufacturer?
  - sandwichbop 3y ago
    >It got me thinking--something similar happened to digital cameras where all the cheap point and shoots were replaced by phones so that now standalone cameras are an expensive niche for photographers. exactly, I think it'll be better now to settle in with OpenPOWER rather than later to not get caught off guard. This whole affordable PC era was a temporary illusion and we can't relie on vendors providing us mitigations since even those eventually cease. Personally I still can't afford a Raptor machine atm but I'm getting in by working on stuff in QEMU with the recommended openPOWER debian release
    - frabre 3y ago
      Thought you might be interested in integricloud: https://www.integricloud.com/ https://www.integricloud.com/ You can get a base working power 9 VM running a lean linux or BSD for about $20/month.