Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
1/10 scale model of a Cray-1 - working & binary compatible
92 views
Skip to first unread message
Christian Brunschen
May 3, 2012, 10:48:30 AM5/3/12
to
http://chrisfenton.com/homebrew-cray-1a/
"As part two (see previous attempt) of my ongoing series in
‘computationanecromancy,â I’ spent the last year and a half or
so constructing my own 1/10-scale, binary-compatible, cycle-accurate
Cray-1. This project falls purely into the “becausI can!â category
�€I was poking around the internet one day looking for a Cray emulator
and came up dry, so I decided to do something about it. Luckily, the
Cray-1 hardware reference manual turned out to be useful enough that
implementing most of this was pretty straightforward. The Cray-1 is one of
those iconic machines that just makes you say “Nothat‘a super
computer!” Sure, your iPhone is 10X faster, and it�€ completely
useless to own one, but admit it . . you really want one, don�€ you?"
But apparently, finding actual Cray-1 software is tricky ...
// Christian
"As part two (see previous attempt) of my ongoing series in
‘computationanecromancy,â I’ spent the last year and a half or
so constructing my own 1/10-scale, binary-compatible, cycle-accurate
Cray-1. This project falls purely into the “becausI can!â category
�€I was poking around the internet one day looking for a Cray emulator
and came up dry, so I decided to do something about it. Luckily, the
Cray-1 hardware reference manual turned out to be useful enough that
implementing most of this was pretty straightforward. The Cray-1 is one of
those iconic machines that just makes you say “Nothat‘a super
computer!” Sure, your iPhone is 10X faster, and it�€ completely
useless to own one, but admit it . . you really want one, don�€ you?"
But apparently, finding actual Cray-1 software is tricky ...
// Christian
Patrick Scheible
May 3, 2012, 1:33:18 PM5/3/12
to
c...@mer.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) writes:
> http://chrisfenton.com/homebrew-cray-1a/
>
> "As part two (see previous attempt) of my ongoing series in
> ‘computationanecromancy,â I’ spent the last year and a half or
> http://chrisfenton.com/homebrew-cray-1a/
>
> "As part two (see previous attempt) of my ongoing series in
> so constructing my own 1/10-scale, binary-compatible, cycle-accurate
> Cray-1. This project falls purely into the “becausI can!â category
> â€I was poking around the internet one day looking for a Cray emulator
> and came up dry, so I decided to do something about it. Luckily, the
> Cray-1 hardware reference manual turned out to be useful enough that
> implementing most of this was pretty straightforward. The Cray-1 is one of
> those iconic machines that just makes you say “Nothat‘a super
> Cray-1 hardware reference manual turned out to be useful enough that
> implementing most of this was pretty straightforward. The Cray-1 is one of
> computer!†Sure, your iPhone is 10X faster, and it†completely
> useless to own one, but admit it . . you really want one, don†you?"
>
> But apparently, finding actual Cray-1 software is tricky ...
>
> // Christian
Sure, modern desktops are theoretically faster, but they're running with
> But apparently, finding actual Cray-1 software is tricky ...
>
> // Christian
the boat anchor of bloat from Windows or some other GUI. I bet the Cray
would still be faster for the sort of jobs it was designed for. Maybe
if you just ran BSD with no X-windows the modern computer would be
competitive.
Software? You've got a Fortran compiler and an assembler, right? What
more do you want?
-- Patrick
Walter Bushell
May 3, 2012, 3:07:48 PM5/3/12
to
In article <86ehr14...@zipcon.net>,
Today no way the Gooey Interfaces don't much interfere with numerical
computation and you can play with your output in graphical format in
real time, instead of plotting it by Calcomp plotter or some drudge
manually plotting points. I've looked at Activity Monitor and if I'm
not doing heavy graphics or sound or movies the confuser cpus are over
90% idle and that's using a laptop early 2010 model. Converting OTA TV
to Quicktime turns on the fan.
Now if you're doing word processing in Weird, maybe so, but you
couldn't do that on a Cray anyway.
--
This space unintentionally left blank.
Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> wrote:
> Sure, modern desktops are theoretically faster, but they're running with
> the boat anchor of bloat from Windows or some other GUI. I bet the Cray
> would still be faster for the sort of jobs it was designed for. Maybe
> if you just ran BSD with no X-windows the modern computer would be
> competitive.
>
> Software? You've got a Fortran compiler and an assembler, right? What
> more do you want?
Back in the 1980's that may have been the case.
> Sure, modern desktops are theoretically faster, but they're running with
> the boat anchor of bloat from Windows or some other GUI. I bet the Cray
> would still be faster for the sort of jobs it was designed for. Maybe
> if you just ran BSD with no X-windows the modern computer would be
> competitive.
>
> Software? You've got a Fortran compiler and an assembler, right? What
> more do you want?
Today no way the Gooey Interfaces don't much interfere with numerical
computation and you can play with your output in graphical format in
real time, instead of plotting it by Calcomp plotter or some drudge
manually plotting points. I've looked at Activity Monitor and if I'm
not doing heavy graphics or sound or movies the confuser cpus are over
90% idle and that's using a laptop early 2010 model. Converting OTA TV
to Quicktime turns on the fan.
Now if you're doing word processing in Weird, maybe so, but you
couldn't do that on a Cray anyway.
--
This space unintentionally left blank.
Al Kossow
May 3, 2012, 3:16:28 PM5/3/12
to
On 5/3/12 10:33 AM, Patrick Scheible wrote:
> Software? You've got a Fortran compiler and an assembler, right?
Wrong
> Software? You've got a Fortran compiler and an assembler, right?
He doesn't even have a complete copy of the OS
Patrick Scheible
May 3, 2012, 6:01:39 PM5/3/12
to
I wonder if Cray filed for copyright and the copyright office still has
copies of the OS.
-- Patrick
Harry Vaderchi
May 4, 2012, 5:54:08 AM5/4/12
to
On Thu, 03 May 2012 15:48:30 +0100, Christian Brunschen <c...@mer.df.lth.se>
wrote:
> http://chrisfenton.com/homebrew-cray-1a/
>
> "As part two (see previous attempt) of my ongoing series in
> ‘computationanecromancy,â I’ spent the last year and a half or
> useless to own one, but admit it . . you really want one, don†you?"
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/classic-tech/the-80s-supercomputer-thats-sitting-in-your-lap/189
<Quote>
Intel’s working on an 80-core CPU that will break the Teraflop barrier
for PCs. This may ship by 2011 or 2012
</Quote>
Anyone seen one yet?
--
[dash dash space newline 4line sig]
Albi CNU
wrote:
> http://chrisfenton.com/homebrew-cray-1a/
>
> "As part two (see previous attempt) of my ongoing series in
> so constructing my own 1/10-scale, binary-compatible, cycle-accurate
> Cray-1. This project falls purely into the “becausI can!â category
> â€I was poking around the internet one day looking for a Cray emulator
> and came up dry, so I decided to do something about it. Luckily, the
> Cray-1 hardware reference manual turned out to be useful enough that
> implementing most of this was pretty straightforward. The Cray-1 is one
> of
> Cray-1 hardware reference manual turned out to be useful enough that
> implementing most of this was pretty straightforward. The Cray-1 is one
> of
> those iconic machines that just makes you say “Nothat‘a super
> computer!� Sure, your iPhone is 10X faster, and it†completely
> useless to own one, but admit it . . you really want one, don†you?"
>
> But apparently, finding actual Cray-1 software is tricky ...
>
> // Christian
from 2008
> But apparently, finding actual Cray-1 software is tricky ...
>
> // Christian
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/classic-tech/the-80s-supercomputer-thats-sitting-in-your-lap/189
<Quote>
Intel’s working on an 80-core CPU that will break the Teraflop barrier
for PCs. This may ship by 2011 or 2012
</Quote>
Anyone seen one yet?
--
[dash dash space newline 4line sig]
Albi CNU
JW
May 4, 2012, 9:39:53 AM5/4/12
to
On Fri, 04 May 2012 10:54:08 +0100 "Harry Vaderchi" <ad...@127.0.0.1>
wrote in Message id: <op.wdr24ir61r0rdn@dell3100>:
>On Thu, 03 May 2012 15:48:30 +0100, Christian Brunschen <c...@mer.df.lth.se>
>wrote:
>
>> http://chrisfenton.com/homebrew-cray-1a/
>>
>> "As part two (see previous attempt) of my ongoing series in
>> ‘computationanecromancy,â I’ spent the last year and a half or
>> so constructing my own 1/10-scale, binary-compatible, cycle-accurate
>> Cray-1. This project falls purely into the “becausI can!â category
>> â€I was poking around the internet one day looking for a Cray emulator
>> and came up dry, so I decided to do something about it. Luckily, the
>> Cray-1 hardware reference manual turned out to be useful enough that
>> implementing most of this was pretty straightforward. The Cray-1 is one
>> of
>> those iconic machines that just makes you say “Nothat‘a super
>> computer!� Sure, your iPhone is 10X faster, and it†completely
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teraflops_Research_Chip
wrote in Message id: <op.wdr24ir61r0rdn@dell3100>:
>On Thu, 03 May 2012 15:48:30 +0100, Christian Brunschen <c...@mer.df.lth.se>
>wrote:
>
>> http://chrisfenton.com/homebrew-cray-1a/
>>
>> "As part two (see previous attempt) of my ongoing series in
>> ‘computationanecromancy,â I’ spent the last year and a half or
>> so constructing my own 1/10-scale, binary-compatible, cycle-accurate
>> Cray-1. This project falls purely into the “becausI can!â category
>> â€I was poking around the internet one day looking for a Cray emulator
>> and came up dry, so I decided to do something about it. Luckily, the
>> Cray-1 hardware reference manual turned out to be useful enough that
>> implementing most of this was pretty straightforward. The Cray-1 is one
>> of
>> those iconic machines that just makes you say “Nothat‘a super
>> useless to own one, but admit it . . you really want one, don†you?"
>>
>> But apparently, finding actual Cray-1 software is tricky ...
>>
>> // Christian
>
> from 2008
>http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/classic-tech/the-80s-supercomputer-thats-sitting-in-your-lap/189
>
><Quote>
> Intel’s working on an 80-core CPU that will break the Teraflop barrier
>for PCs. This may ship by 2011 or 2012
></Quote>
>
>Anyone seen one yet?
Allegedly, someone has:
>>
>> But apparently, finding actual Cray-1 software is tricky ...
>>
>> // Christian
>
> from 2008
>http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/classic-tech/the-80s-supercomputer-thats-sitting-in-your-lap/189
>
><Quote>
> Intel’s working on an 80-core CPU that will break the Teraflop barrier
>for PCs. This may ship by 2011 or 2012
></Quote>
>
>Anyone seen one yet?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teraflops_Research_Chip
Message has been deleted
Patrick Scheible
May 4, 2012, 11:49:11 AM5/4/12
to
-- Patrick
philo
May 4, 2012, 11:40:28 PM5/4/12
to
On 05/03/2012 09:48 AM, Christian Brunschen wrote:
> http://chrisfenton.com/homebrew-cray-1a/
>
> "As part two (see previous attempt) of my ongoing series in
> ‘computationanecromancy,â I’ spent the last year and a half or
> http://chrisfenton.com/homebrew-cray-1a/
>
> "As part two (see previous attempt) of my ongoing series in
> so constructing my own 1/10-scale, binary-compatible, cycle-accurate
> Cray-1. This project falls purely into the “becausI can!â category
> â€I was poking around the internet one day looking for a Cray emulator
> and came up dry, so I decided to do something about it. Luckily, the
> Cray-1 hardware reference manual turned out to be useful enough that
> implementing most of this was pretty straightforward. The Cray-1 is one of
> Cray-1 hardware reference manual turned out to be useful enough that
> implementing most of this was pretty straightforward. The Cray-1 is one of
> those iconic machines that just makes you say “Nothat‘a super
> computer!†Sure, your iPhone is 10X faster, and it†completely
> useless to own one, but admit it . . you really want one, don†you?"
>
> But apparently, finding actual Cray-1 software is tricky ...
>
> // Christian
Great memories.
> But apparently, finding actual Cray-1 software is tricky ...
>
> // Christian
I have a friend who was on the design team for the Cray 1
He gave me a tour of the plant.
So glad I got to see a part of history.
--
https://www.createspace.com/3707686
Andrew Swallow
May 5, 2012, 5:37:51 PM5/5/12
to
archives of Cray software?
Andrew Swallow
jmfbahciv
May 6, 2012, 9:28:16 AM5/6/12
to
Andrew Swallow wrote:
> On 05/05/2012 04:40, philo wrote:
>> On 05/03/2012 09:48 AM, Christian Brunschen wrote:
>>> http://chrisfenton.com/homebrew-cray-1a/
>>>
>>> "As part two (see previous attempt) of my ongoing series in
>>> b computationanecromancy,? Ib spent the last year and a half or
> On 05/05/2012 04:40, philo wrote:
>> On 05/03/2012 09:48 AM, Christian Brunschen wrote:
>>> http://chrisfenton.com/homebrew-cray-1a/
>>>
>>> "As part two (see previous attempt) of my ongoing series in
>>> so constructing my own 1/10-scale, binary-compatible, cycle-accurate
>>> Cray-1. This project falls purely into the b becausI can!? category
>>> ??I was poking around the internet one day looking for a Cray emulator
>>> and came up dry, so I decided to do something about it. Luckily, the
>>> Cray-1 hardware reference manual turned out to be useful enough that
>>> implementing most of this was pretty straightforward. The Cray-1 is
>>> one of
>>> those iconic machines that just makes you say b Nothatb a super
>>> Cray-1 hardware reference manual turned out to be useful enough that
>>> implementing most of this was pretty straightforward. The Cray-1 is
>>> one of
>>> computer!b Sure, your iPhone is 10X faster, and it?? completely
>>> useless to own one, but admit it . . you really want one, don?? you?"
>>>
>>> But apparently, finding actual Cray-1 software is tricky ...
>>>
>>> // Christian
>>
>>
>>
>> Great memories.
>> I have a friend who was on the design team for the Cray 1
>>
>> He gave me a tour of the plant.
>> So glad I got to see a part of history.
>>
>
> Did any big organisation, such as the Meteorological Office, keep
> archives of Cray software?
Or ask a university who had/has a Cray if they have any archives.
>>> But apparently, finding actual Cray-1 software is tricky ...
>>>
>>> // Christian
>>
>>
>>
>> Great memories.
>> I have a friend who was on the design team for the Cray 1
>>
>> He gave me a tour of the plant.
>> So glad I got to see a part of history.
>>
>
> Did any big organisation, such as the Meteorological Office, keep
> archives of Cray software?
/BAH
Quadibloc
May 6, 2012, 4:59:17 PM5/6/12
to
the original one from Cray, but one he wrote himself.
There's always the option of porting Linux - that is, just
a) retarget gcc for the target architecture, and
b) rewrite the assembler-language portions of the kernel
and one has software to run on it... and, gradually, one could, say,
take one of the GPL Fortran 95 compilers out there, and make it use
the underlying Cray-1 with more efficiency.
So turning the thing into a real platform, while a lot of work, is
probably less work than has been done already.
But it may be someone else's turn to do that work.
John Savard
Message has been deleted
Joe Morris
May 6, 2012, 9:01:37 PM5/6/12
to
>a) retarget gcc for the target architecture, [...]
A sort-of similar solution was used at Oak Ridge National Labs (aka "X-10")
when it installed a 360/75 (running an early version of OS/360).
The /75 replaced a CDC 1604, on which the FORTRAN compiler was considered to
be critically deficient by the researchers, in response to which Jerry
Sullivan wrote a very good, efficient, and feature-rich. Over time the
compiler was rewritten in its own language (much like FORTRAN H).
Porting Jerry's compiler to the /75 was relatively straight-forward: the
1604 compiler was modified to emit S/360 object decks, and was then fed its
own source. The output was the compiler for OS/360 which used the native
FORTRAN library. (There may have been a couple of specialized assembly
language programs that had to be recoded from scratch.)
The ported compiler remained the language translator of choice for a long
time, well after FORT-H became available. I don't know if it was still in
use when the optimizing FORTRAN compiler program product showed up.
If anyone here has ever worked with a FORTRAN program that came from ORNL
and it refers to FORTRAN unit numbers starting at 50, it's likely that the
program was originally intended for use with Jerry's FORTRAN compiler.
Joe
A sort-of similar solution was used at Oak Ridge National Labs (aka "X-10")
when it installed a 360/75 (running an early version of OS/360).
The /75 replaced a CDC 1604, on which the FORTRAN compiler was considered to
be critically deficient by the researchers, in response to which Jerry
Sullivan wrote a very good, efficient, and feature-rich. Over time the
compiler was rewritten in its own language (much like FORTRAN H).
Porting Jerry's compiler to the /75 was relatively straight-forward: the
1604 compiler was modified to emit S/360 object decks, and was then fed its
own source. The output was the compiler for OS/360 which used the native
FORTRAN library. (There may have been a couple of specialized assembly
language programs that had to be recoded from scratch.)
The ported compiler remained the language translator of choice for a long
time, well after FORT-H became available. I don't know if it was still in
use when the optimizing FORTRAN compiler program product showed up.
If anyone here has ever worked with a FORTRAN program that came from ORNL
and it refers to FORTRAN unit numbers starting at 50, it's likely that the
program was originally intended for use with Jerry's FORTRAN compiler.
Joe
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Joe Pfeiffer
May 8, 2012, 1:27:21 AM5/8/12
to
Warren Adams <ada...@hiwaay.net> writes:
>>
> Is the model truly faithful to the complete Cray architecture? That
> is, does it have vector registers and do vector pipeline
> floating-point arithmetic? If so, seems like porting some Fortran
> compiler to use that hardware is rather more involved. Especially
> optimizing code for vector arithmetic and memory vector read/write
> like the Cray did.
Haven't looked at it myself, but I've heard it consistently described as
"cycle-accurate", which had better mean it has all those features.
I can see the appeal of getting gcc and linux working on it, but doing
it "right" would mean the original OS and software tools.
>>
> Is the model truly faithful to the complete Cray architecture? That
> is, does it have vector registers and do vector pipeline
> floating-point arithmetic? If so, seems like porting some Fortran
> compiler to use that hardware is rather more involved. Especially
> optimizing code for vector arithmetic and memory vector read/write
> like the Cray did.
Haven't looked at it myself, but I've heard it consistently described as
"cycle-accurate", which had better mean it has all those features.
I can see the appeal of getting gcc and linux working on it, but doing
it "right" would mean the original OS and software tools.
Dave
May 12, 2012, 3:47:46 AM5/12/12
to
simulating even a simple electronic circuit (I used an valve audio amp
and simulated one second of operation) with LTSpice which is multi-core
aware will keep all four happy for a few seconds. Just the sort of work
the Cray was designed for...
The Cray Fortran had extensions so that array manipulation could be run
in the pipeline. However keeping on busy was tricky. Where I worked one
of our Ocean Modellers who produced mathematical models of tides and
currents used to get an hour of Cray time per week, and most weeks he
didn't use it all.
Given the preponderance of multi-cpu PCs I wonder of we will ever see a
parallel Fortran (or C or Algol) for Linux of Windows.
> -- Patrick
Christian Brunschen
May 12, 2012, 4:39:09 AM5/12/12
to
In article <jol4jn$j3j$1...@news.albasani.net>,
Dave <dave....@gmail.com> wrote:
[ much snippage ]
>Given the preponderance of multi-cpu PCs I wonder of we will ever see a
>parallel Fortran (or C or Algol) for Linux of Windows.
OpenMP is a standard that allows programmers to annotate their
otherwise-sequential code, so that compilers to parallelize that code, in
Fortran, C and C++. Compilers:
http://openmp.org/wp/openmp-compilers/
* GCC (the Gnu Compiler Collection) supports OpenMP 3.1, including on
Linux and Windows.
* IBM's XL C/C++ and Fortran compilers also support OpenMP, including on
Linux.
* Intel have compilers that support OpenMP for Linux and Windows.
While this is programmer-guided parallelization as opposed to
fully-automatic, it still allows you to compile the same program and have
the compiler figure out how that best maps to the CPU cores you have
available.
Best wishes,
// Christian
Dave <dave....@gmail.com> wrote:
[ much snippage ]
>Given the preponderance of multi-cpu PCs I wonder of we will ever see a
>parallel Fortran (or C or Algol) for Linux of Windows.
otherwise-sequential code, so that compilers to parallelize that code, in
Fortran, C and C++. Compilers:
http://openmp.org/wp/openmp-compilers/
* GCC (the Gnu Compiler Collection) supports OpenMP 3.1, including on
Linux and Windows.
* IBM's XL C/C++ and Fortran compilers also support OpenMP, including on
Linux.
* Intel have compilers that support OpenMP for Linux and Windows.
While this is programmer-guided parallelization as opposed to
fully-automatic, it still allows you to compile the same program and have
the compiler figure out how that best maps to the CPU cores you have
available.
Best wishes,
// Christian
0 new messages