5 ms·

> I’m all for more architectures but RISC-V has an absurd fandom behind it now. I don't understand what the fandom thinks they're going to get out of RISC-V "w

> I’m all for more architectures but RISC-V has an absurd fandom behind it now. I don't understand what the fandom thinks they're going to get out of RISC-V "winning". You're not going to be able to download a new CPU like you can a new Linux kernel. An open source CPU core is useless without a factory to manufacture it. There's not going to be a GNU equivalent to semiconductor manufacturing. The baseline cost to build a factory is billions of dollars. You also can't just slap any design on any manufacturing node or chemistry. There's a lot work to get a chip design working on a particular node. A CPU is a very small part of a functional computing device. It's some magical thinking to assume just because a device was built on an open source CPU core that somehow the overall system will somehow be more open. Most of the stuff people bitch about being binary blobs will remain binary blobs will remain so even with a RISC-V CPU core. Anything with a radio will remain a black box for regulatory reasons, even if the baseband core is a RISC-V chip. GPUs will remain black boxes only accessible via their drivers' interface. Peripheral controllers covered by patent pools or branding licenses won't cease to be covered even if the controllers are RISC-V.

dagmx 2y ago
The win is ideological not focused on pragmatism imho. Which is fair, but imho one should be honest with themselves if that’s where they’re coming from. If I can use that premise , then all the incongruity makes much more sense.
- calf 2y ago
  Serious, nonrhetorical question, are you suggesting that Turing Award recipient Dave Patterson who is currently on the RISC-V board is somehow dishonest with their philosophy and approaching being taken here?
eternityforest 2y ago
Having only one architecture for almost all devices seems like it would be nice although probably not a super big advantage
- Manabu-eo 2y ago
  Obligatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/ I do recognize that as a royalty free and well supported architecture, very flexible with all the optional extensions, it do have a better shot than others at becoming the standard architecture. But the sheer amount of closed source software written for architectures that keep track of arithmetic flags that would need to be emulated is daunting.
panick21_ 2y ago
RISC-V isn't just the RISC-V standard. Its also a larger movement. What RISC-V critically changes is that open core designs can now openly be shared. This is something that wasn't the case before. Universities and business can now cooperate much better better, people can work on a project in university and commercialize it far faster. > You're not going to be able to download a new CPU like you can a new Linux kernel. An open source CPU core is useless without a factory to manufacture it. A huge number of well designed FPGA cores can actually be download. Not so long ago good open FPGA cores weren't that common. Now there is a wealth of options. And you can get very high quality stuff like OpenTitan and use it yourself. And designing your own CPU and letting it be manufactured more like a PCB isn't as crazy as it was. It used to cost many millions, now you can get it done for much less. 30 years ago hobbits designing their own boards and getting them within a few days wasn't a thing, now its common. Almost every hacker conference now has their own PCB per conference. This wasn't a thing not that long ago. Google worked with SkyWater Technology to actually open source most of their process. You can use a fully open flow and order your own costume chips. Contract manufacturing like that barley was a thing in the 80s, and now its the standard. > A CPU is a very small part of a functional computing device. It's some magical thinking to assume just because a device was built on an open source CPU core that somehow the overall system will somehow be more open. Nobody has this 'magical' thinking, that's a Straw man. Its about observing a longer term trend. Before RISC-V having even open-core wasn't much of a thing. And now that there are quality cores people can spend their time on other thing. Open implementation of different IPs are increasingly being designed. University research on new stuff being done by adding something to an open core. Companies like Tenstorrent added a cool vector ISA to an Open Core. Chips Alliance is investing in tools like Verilator, and other needed things like TileLink interconnects. Yes its not a guarantee that whoever uses RISC-V makes other things open, but at the very least it doesn't hurt. And the other side of the coin is that it makes it very EASY for people who want to make things open. > GPUs will remain black boxes only accessible via their drivers' interface. There are already early attempts at building RISC-V open GPUs, that you can interact with however you want. Sure your not gone get that from NVidea but that doesn't mean its not valuable. > Peripheral controllers covered by patent pools or branding licenses won't cease to be covered even if the controllers are RISC-V. Nobody is disagreeing with that, but its still the case that a lot of things can actually be open. A position that says 'its bad because its not absolute good' is dumb. The point is that RISC-V existing and being successful is just one building block in the idea of information and technology being free and sharable, it moves cooperation and competition to a higher level. It has lots of practical benefits that have already been demonstrated and RISC-V as a movement already had a huge impact on everything from the tooling to peripherals. Just look at RISC-V Foundation, Chip Alliance, CORE-V, Pulp Project and so on and so on. > I don't understand what the fandom thinks they're going to get A better world mostly, and many practical benefits along the way.

dagmx 2y ago

The win is ideological not focused on pragmatism imho. Which is fair, but imho one should be honest with themselves if that’s where they’re coming from. If I can use that premise , then all the incongruity makes much more sense.

calf 2y ago
Serious, nonrhetorical question, are you suggesting that Turing Award recipient Dave Patterson who is currently on the RISC-V board is somehow dishonest with their philosophy and approaching being taken here?

eternityforest 2y ago

Having only one architecture for almost all devices seems like it would be nice although probably not a super big advantage

Manabu-eo 2y ago
Obligatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/ I do recognize that as a royalty free and well supported architecture, very flexible with all the optional extensions, it do have a better shot than others at becoming the standard architecture. But the sheer amount of closed source software written for architectures that keep track of arithmetic flags that would need to be emulated is daunting.

panick21_ 2y ago

RISC-V isn't just the RISC-V standard. Its also a larger movement. What RISC-V critically changes is that open core designs can now openly be shared. This is something that wasn't the case before. Universities and business can now cooperate much better better, people can work on a project in university and commercialize it far faster. > You're not going to be able to download a new CPU like you can a new Linux kernel. An open source CPU core is useless without a factory to manufacture it. A huge number of well designed FPGA cores can actually be download. Not so long ago good open FPGA cores weren't that common. Now there is a wealth of options. And you can get very high quality stuff like OpenTitan and use it yourself. And designing your own CPU and letting it be manufactured more like a PCB isn't as crazy as it was. It used to cost many millions, now you can get it done for much less. 30 years ago hobbits designing their own boards and getting them within a few days wasn't a thing, now its common. Almost every hacker conference now has their own PCB per conference. This wasn't a thing not that long ago. Google worked with SkyWater Technology to actually open source most of their process. You can use a fully open flow and order your own costume chips. Contract manufacturing like that barley was a thing in the 80s, and now its the standard. > A CPU is a very small part of a functional computing device. It's some magical thinking to assume just because a device was built on an open source CPU core that somehow the overall system will somehow be more open. Nobody has this 'magical' thinking, that's a Straw man. Its about observing a longer term trend. Before RISC-V having even open-core wasn't much of a thing. And now that there are quality cores people can spend their time on other thing. Open implementation of different IPs are increasingly being designed. University research on new stuff being done by adding something to an open core. Companies like Tenstorrent added a cool vector ISA to an Open Core. Chips Alliance is investing in tools like Verilator, and other needed things like TileLink interconnects. Yes its not a guarantee that whoever uses RISC-V makes other things open, but at the very least it doesn't hurt. And the other side of the coin is that it makes it very EASY for people who want to make things open. > GPUs will remain black boxes only accessible via their drivers' interface. There are already early attempts at building RISC-V open GPUs, that you can interact with however you want. Sure your not gone get that from NVidea but that doesn't mean its not valuable. > Peripheral controllers covered by patent pools or branding licenses won't cease to be covered even if the controllers are RISC-V. Nobody is disagreeing with that, but its still the case that a lot of things can actually be open. A position that says 'its bad because its not absolute good' is dumb. The point is that RISC-V existing and being successful is just one building block in the idea of information and technology being free and sharable, it moves cooperation and competition to a higher level. It has lots of practical benefits that have already been demonstrated and RISC-V as a movement already had a huge impact on everything from the tooling to peripherals. Just look at RISC-V Foundation, Chip Alliance, CORE-V, Pulp Project and so on and so on. > I don't understand what the fandom thinks they're going to get A better world mostly, and many practical benefits along the way.