Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Itanium IA-64 Support Removed With The Linux 6.7 Kernel

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    AMD: Glues cores together
    Intel: Hey, that's illegal!

    Comment


    • #12
      Yet another legacy architecture is put into the trash where it belongs.

      There's only one way forward, and this way is RISC-V.

      Comment


      • #13
        RISC-V, lol. Call me when there's commodity hardware available, and a software ecosystem.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by tildearrow View Post
          Intel: iAPX 432
          AMD: High-performance x86

          Intel: Itanium
          AMD: 64-bit x86

          Intel: Wells and Lakes with little to no IPC improvement
          AMD: Zen

          Every couple years, Intel falls asleep, and then AMD comes and wakes Intel up.
          iAPX 432's commercial failure had nothing to do with AMD whatsoever. AMD at the time was just second-sourcing Intel designs. AMD didn't start doing genuine inhouse x86 until the K5, a decade later.

          Also, good to see the usual "experts" who have never touched an Itanium system are here in force today.
          Last edited by Dawn; 02 November 2023, 09:46 AM.

          Comment


          • #15
            It was kind of nifty using EFI firmware in the early 2000's instead of PC BIOS. The x86 servers didn't get EFI until over a decade later. From an HP perspective (the largest Itanium consumer by far) Itanium was new and cool in the early days, although the hardware build quality was a noticably lower level. The rp series of servers with PA-RISC chips, when you took them apart and had the components in hand, felt like some proper "big iron". The Itanium rx series felt like a commodity peecee in comparison. Also the whole Oracle lawsuit pushed many customers off, just the uncertainty of the whole thing, and the years of litigation. In the end, that was really what pushed us to dump HP-UX and move our workloads over to RHEL on AMD64 servers. That and all of HP's communications "reassuring" customers of HP's commitment to the platform. It had the same slimy feel as the Compaq "RetainTrust" program a few years earlier, when Compaq was trying to reassure their DEC Alpha customers of their commitment to the Alpha platform... right before they killed it off with the neutered EV7z. Left a bad taste in many folks mouths, so when the same slimy used-car-salesman tactics were brought out again for Itanium, we said "nope, not again" and jumped ship. When the "Kittson" refresh chips were released, our concerns were proven right, as Kittson followed the EV7z playbook to the letter - with all new features dropped. The Itanium lineage brought to a disgraceful end with a minor bump in clock speed as Kittson's only improvement.
            Last edited by torsionbar28; 02 November 2023, 10:25 AM.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by torsionbar28 View Post
              It was kind of nifty using EFI firmware in the early 2000's instead of PC BIOS. Most peecee's didn't get EFI until 10+ years later. From an HP perspective (the largest Itanium consumer by far) Itanium was new and cool in the early days, although the hardware build quality was a noticably lower level. The rp series of servers with PA-RISC chips, when you took them apart and had the components in hand, felt like some proper "big iron". The Itanium rx series felt like a commodity peecee in comparison. Also the whole Oracle lawsuit pushed many customers off, just the uncertainty of the whole thing, and the years of litigation. In the end, that was really what pushed us to dump HP-UX and move our workloads over to RHEL on AMD64 servers. That and all of HP's communications "reassuring" customers of HP's commitment to the platform. It had the same slimy feel as the Compaq "RetainTrust" program a few years earlier, when Compaq was trying to reassure their DEC Alpha customers of their commitment to the Alpha platform... right before they killed it off with the neutered EV7z. Left a bad taste in many folks mouths, so when the same slimy used-car-salesman tactics were brought out again for Itanium, we said "nope, not again" and jumped ship.
              Most rx's were identical hardware to rp. rp3440 and rx2600 were the same machine, for instance, just with an Itanium CPU swapped in and a firmware reflash. Same for rp4440 and rx4640. You could literally field-upgrade an rp4440 to an rx4640 with a firmware swap and dropping in a new CPU. (This was even more true with the larger sx1000/sx2000 cell-based systems.)

              But yes. Screw HP. The years of "we have a solid committed roadmap" followed by "oh, actually, we're pulling the plug" made a lot of folks unhappy.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by Dawn View Post
                Most rx's were identical hardware to rp. rp3440 and rx2600 were the same machine, for instance, just with an Itanium CPU swapped in and a firmware reflash. Same for rp4440 and rx4640. You could literally field-upgrade an rp4440 to an rx4640 with a firmware swap and dropping in a new CPU. (This was even more true with the larger sx1000/sx2000 cell-based systems.)
                I think that was a thing only on the smaller machines? Our smallest integrity boxes were rx6600 which were significantly different from the rp7400's they replaced.
                Last edited by torsionbar28; 02 November 2023, 10:37 AM.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by torsionbar28 View Post
                  I think that was a thing only on the smaller machines? Our smallest integrity boxes were rx6600 which were significantly different from the rp7400's they replaced.
                  That's before my time, but the rp7400 was an older system that never got a direct IPF replacement. The equivalent at the time would have been the rp7410 cell-based system, essentially a mini Superdome, which was replaced by the largely-identical Itanium-based rx7620 and rx7640 machines.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by Dawn View Post
                    But yes. Screw HP. The years of "we have a solid committed roadmap" followed by "oh, actually, we're pulling the plug" made a lot of folks unhappy.
                    BTW, what is the roadmap for HP-UX? I've seen some slides with marketing mumbo-jumbo "committment etc.", but I haven't read anything of a port to some other hardware architecture (and Intel stopped producing Itaniums some time ago already IIRC). Seems the newest high end gear HP sells is x86-64 servers meant for Linux and Windows, which would suggest there is actually no roadmap beyond "do the minimum security updates necessary while we milk the customers for all they're worth until they migrate off HP-UX/IPF".
                    Last edited by jabl; 03 November 2023, 12:42 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      All 3 of its users will be devastated. 2 of them are Phoronix users and one of them is Birdie.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X