LWN recently did an article entitled "Who wrote 2.6.20?" It was areponse to a Time magazine article which claimed that Linux waswritten by volunteers, when most of us know that most Linux kerneldevelopment is done by paid developers.

http://lwn.net/Articles/222773/

In one of the charts he looked at all the changes to the kernel in thelast year, and summed them up by company. The top companies were (drumrollplease):

(Unknown) 740990 29.5%Red Hat 361539 14.4%(None) 239888 9.6%IBM 200473 8.0%QLogic 91834 3.7%Novell 91594 3.6%Intel 78041 3.1%

... and we didn't even do our own distro! Hee hee.

-- greg

_______________________________________________Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.orgTo change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf

!DSPAM:45e884f0261683326710967!

Greg,I'd just want to point out there is a difference between "Linux" and"[recent] Linux kernel development".

That said, thanks so much for your substantial contributions to ongoingkernel development; that's important :-) and gratz on beating out Novell andIntel.Peter

On 3/2/07, Greg Lindahl wrote:>> LWN recently did an article entitled "Who wrote 2.6.20?" It was a> reponse to a Time magazine article which claimed that Linux was> written by volunteers, when most of us know that most Linux kernel> development is done by paid developers.>> http://lwn.net/Articles/222773/>> In one of the charts he looked at all the changes to the kernel in the> last year, and summed them up by company. The top companies were (drumroll> please):>> (Unknown) 740990 29.5%> Red Hat 361539 14.4%> (None) 239888 9.6%> IBM 200473 8.0%> QLogic 91834 3.7%> Novell 91594 3.6%> Intel 78041 3.1%>> ... and we didn't even do our own distro! Hee hee.>> -- greg>> _______________________________________________> Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org> To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit> http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf>

!DSPAM:45e89361268308298414181!-------------- next part --------------An HTML attachment was scrubbed...URL: -------------- next part --------------_______________________________________________Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.orgTo change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf

!DSPAM:45e89361268308298414181!

Long ago I started keeping my notes and a bit of editorial contenton idle power consumption for various computers and related here:

http://saf.bio.caltech.edu/saving_power.html

A few days ago I realized that there was no Intel Core informationin there. Since I don't have any myself, I hunted down aniMac and a PC and found much to my surprise, that while theCore processors were quite efficient when idling, there wasapparently no way to adjust the power consumption downward anyfurther via Enhanced Speed Step (or whatever Intel calls ittoday.) I assume that the CPUs in these two boxes supported thiscapability, but the BIOS (or it's equivalent on a Mac) apparentlydidn't enable this feature. Sure it's a small sample, but in thisday and age I really expected it to be enabled by default prettymuch everywhere.

Anyway, that got me thinking about idle power consumption on clusters. Many of you have machines that run at 100% CPU 24/7, and forthose systems the following discussion is irrelevant. But thereare other clusters around that tend to sit for long periods oftime between jobs, and whatever power they are using while waitingfor a job is pretty close to a total waste. This is even morecommon on regular PCs, where CPU usage is extremely "bursty".The thing is, on pretty much every machine I've seen (exception:some laptops) there is a gaping hole between the lowest powerlevel on a running machine, and the power level when itgoes to sleep. Putting idle nodes all the way to sleep wouldsave the most power, but it is a nightmare in termsof waking them back up again. Besides the issue of disks thatmight not spin back up, there is the problem of the (many)network protocols which are going to time out and break connections. Also returning from sleep nodes tends to be relativelyslow, taking many seconds to many minutes, depending on a wholelot of variables.

So it would be nice if the range of underclocking / undervoltingadjustments provided on compute nodes extended quite a bit furthertowards the lower end than it currently does. Typicallyidle is something like 70-80W at the lowest clock speed and sleepis 2-4W. There's a lot of room in there to work with. Why is therenot a system that can slow down far enough to use only 15W andstill run, albeit very slowly? On a diskless node 7-10W mighteven be possible. Machines running in these nodes would bealive enough to keep network connections open, and would bea whole lot easier to get back up to full speed than theequivalent machine in a sleep state. Assuming the transitionspeed is similar to Cool'N Quiet we're talking much less than a secondto speed back up again.

There are a lot of articles around about statically underclockedmachines, which proves that running modern hardware slowly ispossible, but the statically underclocked machines cannot besped up again - they start slow, and stay slow. Via sells someprocessors like the C7 which will operate over a very wide power range,but unfortunately the fastest those will crunch isn't anywherenear the speed of an Opteron or Core.

Big iron SMP machines often the ability to shut off CPUswhile the machine is running, well, except for the last oneobviously. With quad cores pretty much here, and octo coreson the horizon, one might imagine large power savings at idle could be achieved the same way on these chips. Can any of thehigh core number Opterons or Core CPUs power down unusedcores now?

In closing, does anybody currently make a rack mountable compute node with a really, really, really, low idle power mode,and also competitive performance when running at 100%?

Regards,

David Mathogmathog at caltech.eduManager, Sequence Analysis Facility, Biology Division, Caltech_______________________________________________Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.orgTo change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf

!DSPAM:45e899b2270003326710967!

*** Call for Papers and Announcement ***

Wavelet Applications in Industrial Processing V (SA109)Part of SPIE?s International Symposium on Optics East 20079-12 September 2007 ? Seaport World Trade Center ? Boston, MA, USA

--- Abstract Due Date Deadline prolongation: 4 March 2007 ------ Manuscript Due Date: 13 August 2007 ---

Web sitehttp://spie.org/Conferences/Calls/07/oe/submitAbstract/index.cfm? fuseaction=SA109ABSTRACT TEXT Approximately 500 words.

Conference Chairs: Fr?d?ric Truchetet, Univ. de Bourgogne (France); Olivier Laligant, Univ. de Bourgogne (France)

Program Committee: Patrice Abry, ?cole Normale Sup?rieure de Lyon (France); Radu V. Balan, Siemens Corporate Research; Atilla M. Baskurt, Univ. Claude Bernard Lyon 1 (France); Amel Benazza-Benyahia, Ecole Sup?rieure des Communications de Tunis (Tunisia); Albert Bijaoui, Observatoire de la C?te d'Azur (France); Seiji Hata, Kagawa Univ. (Japan); Henk J. A. M. Heijmans, Ctr. for Mathematics and Computer Science (Netherlands); William S. Hortos, Associates in Communication Engineering Research and Technology; Jacques Lewalle, Syracuse Univ.; Wilfried R. Philips, Univ. Gent (Belgium); Alexandra Pizurica, Univ. Gent (Belgium); Guoping Qiu, The Univ. of Nottingham (United Kingdom); Hamed Sari-Sarraf, Texas Tech Univ.; Peter Schelkens, Vrije Univ. Brussel (Belgium); Paul Scheunders, Univ. Antwerpen (Belgium); Kenneth W. Tobin, Jr., Oak Ridge National Lab.; G?nther K. G. Wernicke, Humboldt-Univ. zu Berlin (Germany); Gerald Zauner, Fachhochschule Wels (Austria)

The wavelet transform, multiresolution analysis, and other space- frequency or space-scale approaches are now considered standard tools by researchers in image and signal processing. Promising practical results in machine vision and sensors for industrial applications and non destructive testing have been obtained, and a lot of ideas can be applied to industrial imaging projects.This conference is intended to bring together practitioners, researchers, and technologists in machine vision, sensors, non destructive testing, signal and image processing to share recent developments in wavelet and multiresolution approaches. Papers emphasizing fundamental methods that are widely applicable to industrial inspection and other industrial applications are especially welcome.

Papers are solicited but not limited to the following areas:

o New trends in wavelet and multiresolution approach, frame and overcomplete representations, Gabor transform, space-scale and space- frequency analysis, multiwavelets, directional wavelets, lifting scheme for:- sensors- signal and image denoising, enhancement, segmentation, image deblurring- texture analysis- pattern recognition- shape recognition- 3D surface analysis, characterization, compression- acoustical signal processing- stochastic signal analysis- seismic data analysis- real-time implementation- image compression- hardware, wavelet chips.

o Applications:- machine vision- aspect inspection- character recognition- speech enhancement- robot vision- image databases- image indexing or retrieval- data hiding- image watermarking- non destructive evalu