[geeks] Can someone sell me a cheap ultra sparc :-)

[Scott Howard]

On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 05:30:47AM -0700, Lionel Peterson wrote:
> --- "Brian W." <bri at sonicboom.org> wrote:
> > Careful how cheap you go, rumor is the u1 wont be supported in the
> > next version of solaris..
> 
> That's odd - the arch is the same as the U2, I wonder why they would
> drop one and keep the other (I refuse to believe they are dropping
> support for the U2 in the next release of Solaris)...

The reason is in "man boot" :

     On systems containing 200MHz or lower  UltraSPARC-1  proces-
     sors,  it  is  possible  for  a user to run a 64-bit program
     designed to exploit a problem that could cause  a  processor
     to stall. Since 64-bit progams cannot run on the 32-bit ker-
     nel, the 32-bit kernel is chosen  as  the  default  file  on
     these systems.

     The code sequence that exploits the problem is very  unusual
     and  is  not likely to be generated by a compiler. Assembler
     code had to be specifically written to demonstrate the prob-
     lem.  It  is  highly  unlikely that a legitimate handwritten
     assembler routine would use this code sequence.

Solaris 7, 8 and 9 include both 32 bit and 64 bit kernels. The CPUs refered
to above default to 32 bit, but you can run them in 64 bit mode if you want
(if you're willing to take the "risk" described above).

Solaris 10 will almost certainly be 64 bit only, so you won't have the
option of running 32 bit mode, which means that any Ultra-1's will be
susecptable to this problem.

I can't speak for the final release, but the current builds certainly
do run on Ultra 1's - in 64 bit mode. So if it is unsupported it'll be
"unsupported" in the "don't call us if it breaks" sense only. Given that
the Ultra-1's themselves are unsupported (from a hardware point of view)
from the end of July this year this shouldn't really be an issue...

  Scott.
  (Speaking for me, not Sun)