Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "suppercomputers".
Did you mean:
supercomputers
2004 Jan 08
2
[LLVMdev] Re: idea 10
...possibly with
> kernel support.
"possibly with kernel support" is kind of crutch to get supercomputer with networking architecture ;)
Reid, couldn't you agree that networking is only a particular interface to get an access to others CPUs?
why should then LLVM be abstracted from suppercomputers with
CPU distributed over network?
All benefits, what one could obtain from "LLVM supporting multiple CPU at single host", one might obtaine from "LLVM supporting multiple CPU at multiple hosts". Isn't that logical?
> I've toyed with the idea of a Linux kernel mod...
2004 Jan 08
0
[LLVMdev] Re: idea 10
Interesting email address there :)
On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 01:18, =?koi8-r?Q?=22?=Valery
A.Khamenya=?koi8-r?Q?=22=20?= wrote:
> For the very beginning think of a host with multiple CPUs.
> I could formulate my proposal even for this non-networked
> case.
On the same machine, LLVM definitely needs to support both symmetric and
asymmetric multi-processing. I believe some primitives to
2004 Jan 08
4
[LLVMdev] Re: idea 10
> My $0.02 worth on this topic ..
and again |0.02 of mein :-)
> However, I find it unreasonable to expect LLVM to provide
> any features in this area. In order to do anything meaningful,
> LLVM would have to have some kind of awareness of networks
> (typically an operating system concern).
> That seems at odds with the "low level" principles of LLVM.
When I