Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 21:51:35 -0600 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Current FreeBSD <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, "O. Hartmann" <ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Subject: Re: Intel XEON Phi: Linux only? Message-ID: <E7D09E4B-293F-4317-9F6B-62C0D0174C3C@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmonNO1vAvyvpMk_eYTFRf0aHKADjg8fB32_by2G8ZpfgAQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <4FE0D080.6020802@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <CAJ-VmonNO1vAvyvpMk_eYTFRf0aHKADjg8fB32_by2G8ZpfgAQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jun 19, 2012, at 4:31 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> I bet the answer is something like "Get FreeBSD up on it or work with
> someone who can help you do that."
>=20
> It's a catch-22 just like GPU - unless ${COMPANY} has customers using
> it, they're not likely to dedicate resources, and no users will use it
> if it doesn't work, so .. who will break the cycle. :)
>=20
>=20
If I may be blunt here, there's no point in idle speculation when there =
are several FreeBSD committers who work for Intel and write Intel =
drivers for FreeBSD. Let's ask them!
Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E7D09E4B-293F-4317-9F6B-62C0D0174C3C>