News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Epiphany-V: A 1024-core 64-bit RISC processor by paulmd on Wednesday October 05, 2016 @02:46PM (#12646603)
I had a friend who mentioned that it was very difficult to get the 64-cores Parallellas with fully-functional Epiphany-IV chips. Are these yield problems going to continue with Epiphany-V or can we expect a full 1024 functional cores per chip?
Re:Epiphany-V: A 1024-core 64-bit RISC processor by adapteva on Wednesday October 05, 2016 @03:17PM (#12646866)
It would be a BIG mistake to assume 1024 working cores. If you want to scale your software you should take a look Google/Erlang and others. Not reasonable to demand perfection at 16nm and below...

Not saying we won't have chips with all cores working, just saying you shouldn't count on it.

Re:Epiphany-V: A 1024-core 64-bit RISC processor by vardump on Thursday October 06, 2016 @08:16AM (#12651774)
So what can we count on?

In a tile based CPU error topology matters. A string of broken cores or a broken core at the edges is likely worse than a broken core with all 4 (or 8?) neighbors working.

Re:Epiphany-V: A 1024-core 64-bit RISC processor by adapteva on Thursday October 06, 2016 @06:03PM (#12656514)
Impossible to characterize without high volume silicon or accurate yield models. We can say that historically, most failures are in SRAM cells and they are limited to a few bits (core still works!) and that in general only one out of N cores will fail. For arguments sake, let's assume the while network always works, but 1 CPU may be broken. (this is what needs to be confirmed later). Does that help?
Re:Epiphany-V: A 1024-core 64-bit RISC processor by vardump on Friday October 07, 2016 @02:41AM (#12658668)
Yes, that helps.

It might be easier to work around broken SRAM bits than just skipping a whole core.

That way you could always have same pipeline layout and not need to compute it dynamically.