Intel XEON Phi: Linux only?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Intel XEON Phi: Linux only?

O. Hartmann-4
Taken this message,
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTExOTE
it seems Intel does favour Linux for the new massiv parallel "Knights
Corner" add-on PCIe card. The news doesn't mention any other opensource
OS (like FreeBSD), but Phoronix is well known for its Linux relation.

So, does Intel have any plans to make the Knights Corner work on *BSD as
well as on Linux? Or did I misunderstood something and other OSes are
already capable of dealing with this type of card?

Well, this adapter card looks promising and very interesting for massive
parallel applications and it would be great if the "Knights Corner"
could be a an alternative for the lack of GPU support in FreeBSD when it
comes to HPC.


signature.asc (499 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Intel XEON Phi: Linux only?

Adrian Chadd-2
I bet the answer is something like "Get FreeBSD up on it or work with
someone who can help you do that."

It's a catch-22 just like GPU - unless ${COMPANY} has customers using
it, they're not likely to dedicate resources, and no users will use it
if it doesn't work, so .. who will break the cycle. :)


Adrian
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Intel XEON Phi: Linux only?

Scott Long-2
On Jun 19, 2012, at 4:31 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:

> I bet the answer is something like "Get FreeBSD up on it or work with
> someone who can help you do that."
>
> It's a catch-22 just like GPU - unless ${COMPANY} has customers using
> it, they're not likely to dedicate resources, and no users will use it
> if it doesn't work, so .. who will break the cycle. :)
>
>

If I may be blunt here, there's no point in idle speculation when there are several FreeBSD committers who work for Intel and write Intel drivers for FreeBSD.  Let's ask them!

Scott


_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Intel XEON Phi: Linux only?

Garrett Cooper
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 8:51 PM, Scott Long <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Jun 19, 2012, at 4:31 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>
>> I bet the answer is something like "Get FreeBSD up on it or work with
>> someone who can help you do that."
>>
>> It's a catch-22 just like GPU - unless ${COMPANY} has customers using
>> it, they're not likely to dedicate resources, and no users will use it
>> if it doesn't work, so .. who will break the cycle. :)
>
> If I may be blunt here, there's no point in idle speculation when there are several FreeBSD committers who work for Intel and write Intel drivers for FreeBSD.  Let's ask them!

+1!
-Garrett
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Intel XEON Phi: Linux only?

Konstantin Belousov
In reply to this post by Scott Long-2
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 09:51:35PM -0600, Scott Long wrote:

> On Jun 19, 2012, at 4:31 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>
> > I bet the answer is something like "Get FreeBSD up on it or work with
> > someone who can help you do that."
> >
> > It's a catch-22 just like GPU - unless ${COMPANY} has customers using
> > it, they're not likely to dedicate resources, and no users will use it
> > if it doesn't work, so .. who will break the cycle. :)
> >
> >
>
> If I may be blunt here, there's no point in idle speculation when
> there are several FreeBSD committers who work for Intel and write Intel
> drivers for FreeBSD. Let's ask them!
Intel released a documentation set for MIC, which does not even contain
any references to the startup sequence and system management. The only
thing which is provided is patch for Linux kernel.

I will be very delighted and want to appear completely wrong, but my
suspect is that FreeBSD will be in the same position with MIC as it is
with Intel GPUs. I asked Intel representative about MIC programming
documentation some time ago, the answer was 'we do provide extensive
documentation for SDK'. After I noted that this is not what is needed
to support the hardware on !Linux, I only get a blank eye.

attachment0 (203 bytes) Download Attachment