From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <13426df10910191030p3801b72ahaaebc529422d6417@mail.gmail.com> References: <20091019163456.GF13857@nipl.net> <13426df10910191030p3801b72ahaaebc529422d6417@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 11:14:56 -0700 Message-ID: <3e1162e60910191114o3884e459i1697a10779915f59@mail.gmail.com> From: David Leimbach To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd7556e17410a04764db961 Subject: Re: [9fans] Barrelfish Topicbox-Message-UUID: 8babf98c-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 --000e0cd7556e17410a04764db961 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 10:30 AM, ron minnich wrote: > On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Sam Watkins wrote: > > > The "processors" (actually smaller processing units) would mostly be > configured > > at load time, much like an FPGA. Most units would execute a single > simple > > operation repeatedly on streams of data, they would not read instructions > and > > execute them sequentially like a normal CPU. > > > > The data would travel through the system step by step, it would mostly > not need > > to be stored in RAM. If some RAM was needed, it would be small amounts > on > > chip, at appropriate places in the pipeline. > > > > Some programs (not so much video encoding I think) do need a lot of RAM > for > > intermediate calculations, or IO for example to fetch stuff from a > database. > > Such systems can also be designed as networks of simple processing units > > connected by data streams / pipelines. > > I think we could connect them with hyperbarrier technology. Basically > we would use the Jeffreys tube, and exploit Bell's theorem and quantum > entanglement. Then we could blitz the snarf with the babble, tie it > all together with a blotz, and we're done. > > ron > > As Sir Robin said in the Holy Grail just before getting tossed off The Bridge of Death. "that's EASY!!" --000e0cd7556e17410a04764db961 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 10:30 AM, ron mi= nnich <rminnich@= gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Sam Watkins <sam@nipl.net> wrote:

> The "processors" (actually smaller processing units) would m= ostly be configured
> at load time, much like an FPGA. =A0Most units would execute a single = simple
> operation repeatedly on streams of data, they would not read instructi= ons and
> execute them sequentially like a normal CPU.
>
> The data would travel through the system step by step, it would mostly= not need
> to be stored in RAM. =A0If some RAM was needed, it would be small amou= nts on
> chip, at appropriate places in the pipeline.
>
> Some programs (not so much video encoding I think) do need a lot of RA= M for
> intermediate calculations, or IO for example to fetch stuff from a dat= abase.
> Such systems can also be designed as networks of simple processing uni= ts
> connected by data streams / pipelines.

I think we could connect them with hyperbarrier technology. Basically=
we would use the Jeffreys tube, and exploit Bell's theorem and quantum<= br> entanglement. Then we could blitz the snarf with the babble, tie it
all together with a blotz, and we're done.

ron

As Sir Robin said in the Holy Grail just before g= etting tossed off The Bridge of Death.

"that's = EASY!!"


--000e0cd7556e17410a04764db961--