IA-32 is dead, IA-64 is the future?

[Unspoken_Magi]

I'm pretty far with my OS, and THEN I find out about symmetric-multi-processing...

I'm screwed. These standards are so terribly implemented I can't go any farther...
Memory mapping APICS, obscure ports, it's not looking good...

So many work-arounds and hacks and BIOS-bugs, etc. just to boot a system..

It's terrible.

Is IA-64 worth it? Standards are clearly spelled out, everything is clean so far...

Is there an IA-64 emulator out there? I don't have an IA-64 comp...

[Tim]

Why bother with IA-64 if you won't be able to test it on a real machine? Stick with IA-32 for now.

[Pype.Clicker]

I think there is a GCC version for IA-64, and an emulator for IA-64 is (iirc) available for free if you order it at Intel (i did it a few years ago ... but never used it : faar too big for my limited computer :-/ )

[Perica]

..

[Pype.Clicker]

afaik Intel had a patent on executing both IA-32 and IA-64 code on a IA-64 processor ...

oh, and iirc, IA-64 processors boots exactly like a IA-32 one as long as you don't turn on some 64-enable bit on it ... so i'm afraid you won't escape the frightening IA-32 multiprocessors support by claiming your OS is targetted @IA-64 .

Sorry

[Tim]

Pype.Clicker: aren't you thinking of AA-64 (AMD's 64-bit extensions to their IA-32 implementation)? I'm not sure, but AFAIK IA-64 uses EFI -- a full, new 64-bit BIOS. AA-64 chips start in 16-bit real mode just like an 8086, and wait for the OS to enter Protected Mode followed by Long Mode.

[Pype.Clicker]

errr... i may have been messing things up ... sorry ::)
btw, IA-64 chip still have a complete IA-32 hardware emulator in them, or not ?

[RicoSanchez]

What I'd like most is an open system with good specification docs. With open I mean available for development for anyone (such as the IA-32) and with good docs I mean docs like the IA-32. But the problem with the PC is, that you have great docs about the processor, you don't have great docs about the system itself. Most is done by the bios, which defines every low level feature (to see what COM ports and LTP ports are available, how many floppy drives, etc...). But the bios is meant for 16 bits mode, I'm not interested in 16 bits mode, I'm interested in 32-bit protected mode. But in pure protected mode, it's suddenly much harder to specify what's in the system. How can you make sure a pc has a vga compatible videocard? How do you know how many floppy drives are available? When developing an OS for the PC in protected mode without using the bios, you have to take things for granted, else it would be impossible to develop.

But as far as my knowledge goes, there no other system as open as the IA-32 pc. Macs are nice systems, but they're not as open as the IA-32 system, are they? And what about any other system? I can't think of any. What I'm interested in a lot are mobile devices. PDAs, cell phones and the likes. I'd love to develop a system for them, but all of them are propietary devices. It is not possible to do so. So that's another thing I can't develop for. I'd also like to develop for modern systems like the x86-64 or the IA-64, but those systems aren't widespread yet and I don't know if there are specifications for the systems itself. Like what hardware must be available and stuff like that.

I actually like how IBM was in control of the pc, everything was specified and open, anyone could implement their own system, as long as they followed the specifications, it would work. But IBM lost their control over the system, the latest pc specification is the AT (right? or is it the XT?). The other thing that was a good thing by IBM was the video standard. We had MDA, CGA, EGA, VGA and a couple of others. There was a standard. After VGA, companies go their own way and then there were tons of different video specifications and as of this date those specifications are all not available.

What I want is the openess like IBM in the old pc days and the technology of todays mobile devices, that will make me a happy man. Till then, I don't feel complete to do something. As a hobbyist you don't have much choice, so it seems.

[Tim]

Pype: AFAIK, 32-bit mode on the IA-64 is similar to V86 mode on the IA-32. That is, a 64-bit OS can host 32-bit code.

Rico: if IBM had had their way then the PC architecture would still remain closed. It was Compaq who opened up the PC by reverse-engineering the PC BIOS; other manufacturers helped by building clones of the hardware.

[RicoSanchez]

...

Rico: if IBM had had their way then the PC architecture would still remain closed. It was Compaq who opened up the PC by reverse-engineering the PC BIOS; other manufacturers helped by building clones of the hardware.

Oh, and I thought Compaq sucked... I hope more open systems like todays PCs will become available, but with good specifiations.

Todays PCs are like Linux, both build by different people, each and every person adds their own stuff and makes the whole system really complex. That's probably why Linux is so great for the IA-32.

[Mr_Spam]

i found some performance test results for the i860 -64bit processor on the nasa website but i couldn't find any programming data on this processor....

[distantvoices]

Pc bIOS... i ve been told this kind of code is sort of a mess of spaghetti like assembler code full of nasty obfuscating trickses that make reverse engineering that stuff nearly inpossible... maybe I ve misunderstood.

Yo folks, there is a mess of standards around the pc so one has to scrutinize the very nitty gritty of it to create something running. Be it on IA-64 be it on IA-32 environment.

ad emulating 32 bits on 64 bits machine: I think Tim is right: It would need a kind of protected environment for this stuff - like a virtual processor on BS2000 mainframe.