65 points

This is certainly positive news. We need more competition in the processor field. Having essentially a choice between Intel and AMD got us malware like the Intel Management Engine and its AMD equivalent. With a monopoly comes enshitification.

permalink
report
reply
21 points

Not that I disagree with you but what’s stopping any ARM or RISC-V CPU manufacturer from putting their own version of IME in their chips?

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

ARM TrustZone is already common on A-series. Device manufacturers want secure storage & computation, so chipmakers provide it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

There’s ARM, with Snapdragon, Mediathek, Broadcom, Nvidia, Apple and Ampere. Contrary to RISC-V it’s already used in many computers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

All of which also have plenty of proprietary components and aren’t created with FOSS in mind.

I hope that as RISC-V progresses, companies will pick it up and develop on top of it, giving users full access to their hardware alongside FOSS software

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Sure, but they’re all using ARM IP; RISCV isn’t just one entrant into the processor IP market like ARM is, it allows any company to become an entrant with its own IP.

Sure it’s not currently the ISA for man main processors, but it is already used by companies like NVIDIA and WD in their products.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

What is the amd equivalent?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Duopolys might be worse. The illusion of choice and opponent security.

permalink
report
parent
reply
58 points

Why is RISC-V significant? I’m completely out of the loop and have only heard of it in passing.

permalink
report
reply
135 points

Open standard CPU instruction set. Meaning people can design new chips for it without needing to enter an expensive license agreement.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

I would have thought the license agreement would be one of the least expensive parts of making modern high-performance chips.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

Quite the opposite. Well, sort of.

It’s easy to get a licence, you just need money. Lots of money.

That’s if you can get a licence. Intel only licensed to AMD because the USA military requires two vendors.

ARM charges an, err, arm and a leg.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Tbh the biggest saving from this that I’ve actually heard was time saving some 6 months or even potentially saving legal costs during development. Which for a budget starting closer to nothing,like academics, open source, or early start ups, any cost is barrier.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

It’s actually very lucrative scheme. For example, you’ll need to get some licenses to some Qualcomm patents before you can even buy their Snapdragon chips.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

If you have the order volume, enough capital to book fab capacity and a solid margin, kind of. These agreements are often done in cents per chip with minimum volume amounts, this is why you see most complicated ARM SoCs targeted at the smartphone market first and trickle down into lower margin products later.

This is the consequences of only being able to get your licence from one vendor.

permalink
report
parent
reply
75 points

Because it’s an open Instruction Set Architecture.

Many different companies used to design their own CPU IS architectures in the past like (MIPS, AVR, PIC, …) and of course the most popular ARM. Downside of this is that the software and ecosystems between these architectures are not compatible. Effort wasted in porting a library to one architecture cannot be always reused for another.

Recently we see a lot of companies adopting RiscV, and there is a big collaboration between them to ratify the specification and provide software support. This will in turn accelerate the development, and software and hardware support will hopefully overtake ARM in the future.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

And Apple will get to do a fourth architecture migration

permalink
report
parent
reply

I thought their old PowerPc architecture was risc

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

Its completely open source

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

It’s an open standard that enables open source implementation (and several industry supported options exist), most notably IMO xiangshan and vroom

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Because we’re getting risc one way or another and the two targets are risc-v and arm. All the phones, tablets, mini pcs and apple made the jump to either arm or risc-v.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

Really really glad for this. Can’t wait for next LMDE release. 😊😄🥹

permalink
report
reply
24 points

Anyone know what kind of board used by Debian maintainers for testing Debian on RISC-V?

permalink
report
reply
3 points

The porterbox is a HiFie Unmatched.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

This one? https://www.sifive.com/boards/hifive-unmatched

Very interesting, looks like you can buy it for $700 on AliExpress. I wonder if there are other debian compatible RISC -V boards with cheaper prices. $700 is not exactly hobbyist friendly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

You may run into a few hurdles until ACPI support for RISC-V devices matures a bit, but hopefully it’ll be better than the situation with ARM boards.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

That’s amazing! Any PCBs with RiscV chips available? I’d love to compile and run a node in my k8s cluster with it to test how it would run. I’d love a more efficient node!

permalink
report
reply
18 points
*

Here you go: RISC-V Exchange: Available Boards
EDIT: Good luck finding any boards in stock. Sorry.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

That’s awesome, thanks for pointing me there

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Another option: Pine64’s board

permalink
report
parent
reply

Linux

!linux@lemmy.ml

Create post

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word “Linux” in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

  • Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
  • No misinformation
  • No NSFW content
  • No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

Community stats

  • 9.6K

    Monthly active users

  • 6.1K

    Posts

  • 170K

    Comments