os that rather uses the gpu?

JD jd1008 at gmail.com
Thu Jul 15 07:18:49 UTC 2010


  On 07/14/2010 11:41 PM, mike cloaked wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 5:27 AM, john wendel<jwendel10 at comcast.net>  wrote:
>
>> Agreed that an OS kernel hasn't much use for a GPU. But it should be
>> easy to add a small general purpose CPU (ARM or Intel Atom) and a couple
>> of usb ports to the card and move X completely to the video card. Just
>> like a remote X server only in the same box.
>>
>> I really think the OP was referring to having user mode code take
>> advantage of the high processing power of modern GPUs. It works now, but
>> could be improved if the OS contained specialized scheduling support for
>> these kinds of jobs.
> I understand that the GPU has no page faults, and is missing many of
> what we regard as the essential functions of a normal processor?  Also
> getting large amounts of data in or out of the GPU is slow - it is
> fast partly because there is a lot less overhead compared to a single
> processor and partly from the advantage of multiple cores. I was
> speaking to someone who has been working with GPU processing for
> several years and was skeptical about getting code to run reliably
> across different GPUs...  and of course CUDA is vendor specific as fa
> as I know? So speed gain is dependent on the kind of processing needed
> but if anything goes wrong then it can easily crash the system.
>
> Anyone had any experience with using the GPU could perhaps comment?
Sorry to barge in this late into this thread....
Was the originator of the thread interested in the kernel
to use the gpu for floating point operations or integer
operations?
If floating point, the x86 (among others) already has an
integrated fpu, and the integer logic is already in the cpu (or alu).
So I do not understand what sort of computations the originator
of the thread would like to see done on the gpu.

jd


More information about the users mailing list