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

[Kevin]

i think that i have had more fun with u1's becuase they are a good cheap
play toy you can actually do something with, then any other workstation.

k.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Howard" <scott at doc.net.au>
To: "The Geeks List" <geeks at sunhelp.org>
Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 6:03 AM
Subject: Re: [geeks] Can someone sell me a cheap ultra sparc :-)


> 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)
> _______________________________________________
> GEEKS:  http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/geeks