choudanu4

Can Wachy be used to trace kernel code as well? And would you need to do anything specific to get that to work? (How would Wachy find the kernel sources?)

I was thinking this would be pretty cool to use for debugging device drivers on embedded devices especially w.r.t latency.

Since you seem to know, what company would one go to for fabricating a 500nm chip these days at that price?

Does the PhantomData type in Rust do what you want? Or are you talking about something slightly different?

https://doc.rust-lang.org/nomicon/phantom-data.html

https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/marker/struct.PhantomData.html

So

  struct Sender<S> {
    /// Actual implementation of network I/O.
    inner: SenderImpl;  
    /// 0-sized field, doesn't exist at runtime.
    state: S;
  }

  struct Sender<S> {
    /// Actual implementation of network I/O.
    inner: SenderImpl;  
    /// 0-sized field, doesn't exist at runtime.
    _marker: PhantomData<S>;
  }

AMD’s primary advertised improvement here is the use of a TAGE predictor, although it is only used for non-L1 fetches. This might not sound too impressive: AMD is still using a hashed perceptron prefetch engine for L1 fetches, which is going to be as many fetches as possible, but the TAGE L2 branch predictor uses additional tagging to enable longer branch histories for better prediction pathways. This becomes more important for the L2 prefetches and beyond, with the hashed perceptron preferred for short prefetches in the L1 based on power.

I found this paragraph confusing, is it talking about data prefetchers (Which would make sense b/c of the mention of short prefetches) or branch predictors? (Which would make sense b/c of the mention of TAGE and Perceptron)

Does anyone know where I could get more information on Tools?

Yes, but for the previous few generations of transistor manufacturing, transistors' power consumption has not scaled down as well as their size. This is known as the failure of Dennard Scaling[0].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennard_scaling

But I was under the impression that Linux isn't suitable as a real-time operating system (RTOS)[1] (which Microsoft may very well not require for their IoT systems). So the Linux Foundation providing an alternative free kernel meeting RTOS requirements makes perfect sense.

I'm not as clear on the history, but was Linux ever pitched as capable of being real-time OS? I don't think so. The hard requirements for real-time generally lead to very different systems than general-purpose operating systems.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real-time_operating_system

I was under the impression that the previous discussion got flagged because it was behind a paywall.

Don't despair, I think we do care. :)

Neural networks aside, machine learning is often used for implementing prediction mechanisms in CPUs. Good examples of prediction mechanisms are:

- Branch Predictor

- Cache Replacement Policy

- Memory Prefetcher

- Schedulers

They mentioned in the article that the full cache of each die is available. Additionally, EPYC uses the same dies used in Ryzen. I'd look at earlier articles for Ryzen to determine latencies within a single die.

So for whatever cores are enabled on each die, you get the L1/L2 caches for each core as per the Ryzen launch. Additionally, you get all of the shared L3 cache, irrespective of the number of cores disabled per core complex. This pattern follows across all four dies in each socket.

Even when discussing CPU caches, there are policies that can severely outperform LRU, specifically at the Last-Level Cache (LLC).

LLCs often are exposed to access streams where the temporal locality (which is the assumption that makes LRU good) has been filtered out by earlier caches.

For that reason, newer cache replacement policies such as RRIP, SHiP, and Hawkeye have significant headroom to improve upon LRU (and PseudoLRU).

WiFi Direct differs from WiFi Awareness in respect to the presence of the access point. In WiFi direct, there is no access point, and the devices connect directly to each other. With WiFi Awareness, an access point serves as a middle-man, but it is not necessary to access the Internet.

I think parametric design could be used here, but to what extent that would be useful, I'm not sure.

This is an interesting idea that has been explored before in VMS, an old operating system I believe competed with UNIX.

VMS had a feature called CLE (Common Language Enviornment) [1] which defined calling conventions for computing primitives (functions, registers, stacks...you get it) independent of any language. You could call bits of code from all sorts of languages like COBAL, FORTRAN, C, and some others I'm not really familiar with. Because the calling conventions were specifically designed for language interopperability in mind, VMS was implemented in several different languages. Different components were coded in whatever language best expressed them. This directly contrasts with Unix, which we all know champions C.

I'm not too familiar with Unix calling convention specifics, but as I understand, it revolves around C and its memory model. I believe this is what gives some languages difficulty "talking" with each other; if a language doesn't have a memory or execution model close to C's, it needs to translate through a FFI (Foreign Function Interface) [2] before exchanging execution routines efficiently.

[1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenVMS#Common_Language_Enviro...)

[2] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_function_interface)

USB-C and USB-3 aren't mutually exclusive. One describes the shape (Type-A, Type-C) of the connector. The other describes the speeds supported by the port (USB2, USB3, USB3.1).

The raspberry pi 3 only runs in 32-bit mode right now [1]. There is no 64-bit kernel for it currently.

[1] https://www.linux.com/news/raspberry-pi-3-still-essentially-...

Rip the ISO from the discs, then load them up in Dolphin on your Mac.

This incorrect. While Gecko is not in its entirety going away, components of Gecko will be replaced with Servo's code.

Such is detailed at Servo's roadmap. https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap

Specficially:

> Internally committed 2016 goals

> Ship one Rust component in Firefox Nightly, riding the trains

> Experiment with the uplift of a major piece of Servo into Gecko

The compiler for Rust still needs work in order to support the partial compiling required for typical IDE.

Just to clarify, unless you're a student/educator, Fusion360 is only free for 30 days....after that you have to pay.

Couldn't they force the hardware/software modifications when people go in for yearly inspections?

Language feature-wise, I think python 3 has very little complained about it. The chief complaints about python I hear are anything to do with packaging software and multi threading the second of which will hopefully be fixed by 3.7.

Obviously, the 2 to 3 debacle is a constant source of grief, but I don't think that necessarily fits in with the subject at hand: language features that people contest over.

Amen, for linux's copy-to-ram!

I use the Slitaz distribution on my old Compaq computer from 1999, and wow! Even with only 384 MB of RAM, the system is blazing fast, all thanks to copy-to-ram!

To be clear, all this data sharing is on by default, but all the settings to turn this data sharing off do exist, they're just buried in settings (as they should be). Indeed, cutting ties with google is quite possible (just don't sign in with a google account when setting your phone up).

There is another more involved approach that removes the connection altogether, instead of simply closing a valve between your data and Google.

Indeed, what may be alluring would be getting an easy-to-wipe phone (like a Nexus 5) and install a ROM (aftermarket OS) sans Google Play Services (the suite of apps on Android that hooks into Google's Cloud). If you were to do this, you would obtain many of the smartphone's advantages, but still be able to clearly control where your data goes.

Or an alternative option that requires less work: A list of the objectionable features and how to turn them off in one place? An app would be quite a lot of work, but a reputable, single bulletin with the info would help greatly. That way I (and others) could rest assured that we didn't miss one or two settings whilst blindly searching.

The security researcher who was interviewed was not able to garner how the malware gets in as that would require breaking into the infected systems, which he was not prepared to do (as it would be illegal).

The entire podcast was simply statistics, with the occasional repeated reminder to update packages.

The key takeaway was that linux servers when infected are often used as attack vectors for distributing a further set of malware on windows computers (which are the end target). The estimate from the podcast said of the compromised URLs that the researcher investigated, 80% ran some derivative of linux (i.e. apache server) and 20% were windows (an insignificant [~.1%] were other OSs). Another point, the researcher claimed was that 20% of the "compromised" linux URLs were actually infrastructure set up by exploiters themselves, rather than servers taken over forcibly. A final point, the researcher noted that many (no definite statistic here) of the compromised linux servers were running old versions of software (be it apache or whatever).

TL;DR: Linux servers (when compromised) are often used as attack vectors to distribute malware to Windows computers (which are the end targets).

Is there any repository of knowledge for learning these best practices?

Would anyone familiar with the various qualities of FPGA boards care to weigh in on how to pick a good development board for this project? I personally know nothing about FPGA specs.

Additionally, the first blog post in this series can be found at http://labs.domipheus.com/blog/designing-a-cpu-in-vhdl-part-...

Considering the philosophy of Python, how likely is it that this idea of return/parameter independence be introduced into the language (via a PEP or whatnot)?

Well, I personally presumed that neural networks would require two or three orders of magnitude more of code. When its revealed that the code is actually much more manageable, individuals (such as myself) take the dive into the subject, knowing that it is something we can at least get through.