GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
View Poll Results: Do you want Intel to support Linux on Clover Trail?
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
(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?
Last edited by salasi; 09-20-2012 at 02:55 AM.
Reason: Question added at the end
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)
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.