LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   General (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/general-10/)
-   -   Some News I want to share with everyone. (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/general-10/some-news-i-want-to-share-with-everyone-4175427349/)

suttiwit 09-15-2012 12:35 AM

Some News I want to share with everyone.
 
I am using Mint, so, I am online at the Internet Relay Chat Channel. This thing shocks me:
Code:

<mitchell> Bad News: Intel will not support Linux on its Clover Trail processors : http://is.gd/lCTHkT Microsoft-Intel Cabal War vs Android
Yeah, thats all...

Also, Incase if you don't know... Clover Trail is the name of the next Intel Processor.

sKaar 09-15-2012 02:18 AM

it's one of those 'big hairy friggin deal' things... if it's a TOTALLY new architecture, other os manufacturers they will support, intel will have to give them all the tools to make it easy for them to work with it... but that's not even the real problem. it's the compilers that are important, the header files that are released for the processor, so compilers used on the supported operating systems can actually work on it, they can be used in other compilers. if there's headers released that will work in one c compiler they'll work on other c compilers that meet the particular c language requirements, gcc will probably be unaffected.

in days long past, intel wrote their own compiler, it had special optimising code n stuff, THAT probably won't be supported on linux, but i don't think it's ever been supported on linux. there are a lot of ide's that programmers on linux use, there's even many that edit the raw code in text editors, no support beyond a few files that describe the hardware to the compiler is needed from intel at all.

H_TeXMeX_H 09-15-2012 04:26 AM

This Inquirer link has more info.

Quote:

Intel went to great lengths to highlight the new P-states and C-states in which it can completely shut down the clock of a core. The firm said the operating system needs to provide "hints" to the processor in order to make use of power states and it seems likely that such hints are presently not provided by the Linux kernel in order to properly make use of Clover Trail.
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...?WT.rss_f=Home

I don't buy tablets, so I don't really care, but usually Intel supports their hardware on Linux to a good extent, like the article mentions. It is unfortunate that they will not support it, but maybe they will change their mind as the kernel evolves or maybe this Clover Trail will just fail, like the article predicts.

As for AMD, see:
AMD "Hondo" APUs May Not Be Too Linux Friendly
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...tem&px=MTE4NTY

I feel the power of M$ is affecting them.

DavidMcCann 09-16-2012 12:37 PM

As I read it, it's just a case of the Linux kernel needing to support these things with new features. What's the difference between that and needing new drivers for other hardware? Intel tells us about the P-states and C-states, Linux supports them. What's the problem?

There's too much conspiracy theory around here! With countries like Russia, Brazil, France, etc adopting Linux for large sections (or even all) of their government, who's going to make chips that won't run it? "Let's make a chip that can't be used in a computer for a Brazilian school or a Russian ministry!" I don't think so.

H_TeXMeX_H 09-17-2012 01:42 AM

Why would both Intel and AMD adopt the same strategy ? I think the evil of M$ is influencing them.

sKaar 09-17-2012 03:18 AM

a lot of small companies are making their own processors based on old designs or new ones, some even get decent processors from fpga's, small foundries making medium density processors, they may not be particularly powerful, but that's the way linux and other open source started. people with the guts to try it, and the ability to make most of the hardware, can start their own foundries that can pump out late 90's era power processors by the hundreds every year.

with linux, there's always been a bit of 'we can make it work ANYWHERE' attitude, last i heard was that the biggest limitation was lack of hardware mmu's, which was overcome on some cores. ms badly influencing core makers, they could be opening the gates on the urge to be free not only from software lockin, but hardware lockin.

k3lt01 09-17-2012 03:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMcCann (Post 4781716)
There's too much conspiracy theory around here!

As Meatloaf says "you took the words right out of my mouth".

brianL 09-17-2012 05:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMcCann (Post 4781716)
There's too much conspiracy theory around here!

Yeah, it must be a conspiracy to spread conspiracy theories. ;)

H_TeXMeX_H 09-17-2012 09:45 AM

The opposite of a conspiracy theory is an ignorance theory ... or really just a philosophy of ignorance.

/dev/random 09-17-2012 11:40 AM

I bet all this is for is to see if Microsoft and x86 (wintel) can break ARM's hold on the mobile market. If it holds true I can see why AMD would be doing the same, because why let intel have even more of the pie they already have? So I kinda get why AMD would be involved.


What do you guys think? Am I crazy or just very imaginative?

sKaar 09-18-2012 12:51 AM

mmm, well, dropping options is dumb when other companies offerings are mopping up the market, but if the other companies aren't supporting linux well either, no big, for them at least.

H_TeXMeX_H 09-18-2012 01:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by /dev/random (Post 4782433)
I bet all this is for is to see if Microsoft and x86 (wintel) can break ARM's hold on the mobile market. If it holds true I can see why AMD would be doing the same, because why let intel have even more of the pie they already have? So I kinda get why AMD would be involved.


What do you guys think? Am I crazy or just very imaginative?

That is plausible, because indeed the ARM market has exploded with new devices. It's a pitiful attempt really by Intel and AMD.

salasi 09-20-2012 02:51 AM

OK, so I'm sure that this won't be popular, but just so that people are aware that the original announcement has been a bit revised:

http://www.zdnet.com/intels-new-clov...ux-7000004451/

(you may have got the key theme from the URL, but it is still worth reading).

And, of course, there is still the argument about whether anybody really wants it; this series of processors has a development history rather like Intel's attempts with graphics....the one that you have today is cr*p, but the next release is going to be fine and compete against, or beat, other parts in the same market area....except that it never does, it is always only competitive against the previous generation, and sometimes only if you take a marketing person's one eyed view of performance.

So, would it be missed? Possibly not, but if it was a sign of a longer-term trend, that might be serious. But who knows if it is that or something else? I mean, what would

Oh, and for those who voted yes to the poll, what do you want it for? I mean what do you expect this part to do that is so great, or for what application would you expect to buy one?

H_TeXMeX_H 09-20-2012 04:21 AM

See my comments here on that article:
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...4/#post4784047

There is no explicit mention of it supporting Linux, it is speculation/misinterpretation done by zdnet, as usual.

hydraMax 10-01-2012 03:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMcCann (Post 4781716)
As I read it, it's just a case of the Linux kernel needing to support these things with new features. What's the difference between that and needing new drivers for other hardware? Intel tells us about the P-states and C-states, Linux supports them. What's the problem?

From what I've heard, Torvalds and his team are still getting paid good money to keep the kernel up to date. Somehow I'm guessing that making Linux run correctly on the latest Intel chip will be a fairly high priority on the list. 8)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:55 AM.