First Fedora Image For the MIPS Available For Testing 28
New submitter alexvoica writes: Today Fedora contributor Michal Toman has announced that the first Fedora 22 image for 32-bit MIPS CPUs is available for testing; this version of the operating system was developed using our Creator CI20 microcomputer, which includes a 1.2 GHz dual-core MIPS processor. In addition, Michal announced he is working on a 64-bit version designed to run on MIPS-based Cavium OCTEON III processors.
Linux everywhere. (Score:2)
My first thought was, "oh holy crap, MIPS is still a thing?"
Awesome to see non ARM, non Intel ISAs get some support from large Linux institutions.
Re: (Score:2)
I hear they're going to port to the 6502 next!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, people just don't know about them because they are embedded products. There's a lot of routers that use MIPS chips. Intel/AMD x86(64) and ARM are so well known because the chip is one of the bullet points on the marketing materials such as desktops, laptops, phones, and tablets. MIPS chips are put into devices where the processor isn't used as a marketing point. That's not to say it's a bad chip, just stating the way it is.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Linux everywhere. (Score:5, Informative)
(1) Hardware multi-threading support: MIPS offers SMT support for the latest Warrior CPUs [imgtec.com]; for a slight increase in area (~10%), you can scale up the number of hardware threads (1, 2, 4) and get a 40-50% boost in performance. ARM CPUs do not support SMT and can only scale in number of cores.
(2) Better hardware virtualization support: MIPS Warrior CPUs support hardware virtualization at the low end (e.g. microcontrollers) as well as the high end (application processors). ARM CPUs support hardware virtualization only at the high end. Moreover, MIPS CPUs support multiple trusted execution environments (up to 7 in MCUs, up to 31 at the high end) while ARM CPUs have only one TEE.
(3) Better raw DSP performance: MIPS Warrior CPUs offer superior DSP performance vs. equivalent ARM CPUs (e.g. up to 2.5x better DSP performance in MCUs [imgtec.com])
(4) Better performance efficiency: MIPS CPUs offer equivalent performance but at smaller area/power consumption over equivalent ARM cores (e.g. up to 30% area savings at the cluster level and 40% savings at the core level [imgtec.com] relative to similar performance competition)
(5) More mature 64-bit ecosystem in networking and embedded: MIPS 64-bit CPUs have a rich history in high-performance enterprise networking (examples include Broadcom XLP and Cavium OCTEON processors); there is a whole ecosystem formed around OpenWrt on MIPS for example.
Re: (Score:2)
Based on what is written about them, they seem fairly interesting; but they don't actually seem to exist anywhere. You can get relatively low end MIPS cores in a lot of routers and such (ramips based devices and some broadcom) and much punchier hardware from outfits like Cavium; but the field is pretty empty of the 'warrior+powerVR' SoCs that are proposed in
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
How about the SGI SkyWriter?
Re: (Score:2)
Holy crap, I just looked those things up, they are glorious. And here I was going to make a joke about wanting to run it on an Indigo. You sir, are a true master of the craft.
Re: (Score:3)
What about a PlayStation 2? Be nice to have a modern Linux on it.
(And yes, I know the answer is no, since Sony had to do a custom distro for the wacky architecture. It's not plain MIPS, it's MIPSEEL)
Re: (Score:1)
Stick a fork in MIPS (Score:2)
Are there any SBCs that don't cost twice as much as the equivalent ARM? And preferably, made by a company that knows that "minicomputer" already has a meaning?
Seems like ARM got cheaper than MIPS a long time ago, and the only reason MIPS is still hanging on is inertia
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)