Reason for Crazy CXL Names

By: dmcq (, June 26, 2022 11:54 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
Michael S ( on June 26, 2022 7:32 am wrote:
> Dummond D. Slow ( on June 26, 2022 6:49 am wrote:
> > Michael S ( on June 26, 2022 1:30 am wrote:
> > > dmcq ( on June 25, 2022 11:18 am wrote:
> > > > Gary Kopp (gary.kopp.delete@this.x.x) on June 24, 2022 1:43 pm wrote:
> > > > > > it would be better for their customers and for CXL if the different CXL options were
> > > > > > named by their intended application, such as CXL.nic, CXL.gpu and CXL.dram
> > > > >
> > > > > Intel might be intentionally trying to make the names confusing so less people realize that CXL.mem in
> > > > > Sapphire Rapids has some bugs. Intel is probably worried that they will look bad if AMD’s Genoa processor
> > > > > has working versions of all 3 CXL protocols and Sapphire
> > > > > Rapids doesn’t. By intentionally creating confusion,
> > > > > Intel could be trying to buy time while they fix the bugs in CXL.mem in Sapphire Rapids.
> > > >
> > > > I wouldn't be surprised if they wanted CXL to die die die. They like having the CPU in charge of everything.
> > >
> > > If they wanted CXL dead then wasn't it simpler to not invent it 3 years ago?
> > >
> >
> > But then a similar technology would be standardised by competitors and that would be even worse,
> > I assume. Not that I thought the idea of Intel wanting CXL gone was true, though maybe some groups
> > or isolated people in the company do. Or they regret they opened the ecosystem to others.
> Without any knowledge of Intel internal politics, I would think that there shouldn't be any
> opposition to CXL-attached memory. It's a small harmless potentially very profitable niche.
> As to other two, I can see people not happy about because it's essentially PCIe,
> so why add another sub-standard that adds so little? Occcam strikes against it.
> Also I can see opposition to CXL-ccIo for an exact opposite reason - it's too big a change from PCIe
> with unclear and possibly very bad consequences to system performance unless absolutely everything done
> perfectly right. Also, it appears to rely on technologies (in-memory cache directory or big snap filters)
> that are unlikely to ever be incorporated into client silicon in uncompromising manner.
> So, it's going to cause a yet another split in experience between low end and high
> end. I.e. something that I suppose "server" people love, but "client" people hate.
> But, of course, I am looking at it from technical angle, which more often than not
> is a wrong angle to look for one who really want to understand corporate politics.

Did you mean the whole CXL shebang including CXL.cache by ccio? The version of cache coherency envisioned by Intel is very limited compared to the competition, basically everything is handled by them or they wash their hands of it and treat the GPU or whatever as io memory - but at least you can switch modes so you can have a operiod of one and then of the other. So nothing much to implement in the accelerator which Intel push as an advantage. Yes you are right something like ARM's CCIX would require a module to support it stuck in the accellerator. They see silicon area as getting less important and favour the long-term and ease of use- whaich is what one has to do if one is selling IP. I see it as something to just stop people using a competitive product and to slow progress.
< Previous Post in ThreadNext Post in Thread >
TopicPosted ByDate
Crazy CXL NamesPeter Lewis2022/05/30 03:54 PM
  Crazy CXL Namesanon22022/05/30 07:19 PM
    Crazy CXL NamesPeter Lewis2022/05/30 09:30 PM
      Crazy CXL Namesanon22022/05/31 02:24 AM
        Crazy CXL NamesPeter Lewis2022/05/31 02:43 AM
          Crazy CXL Namesanon22022/05/31 03:01 AM
            Crazy CXL NamesPeter Lewis2022/05/31 03:36 AM
              Crazy CXL Namesanon22022/05/31 04:32 AM
                Crazy CXL NamesPeter Lewis2022/05/31 05:21 AM
                  Crazy CXL Namesanon22022/05/31 06:03 AM
                    Crazy CXL NamesPeter Lewis2022/05/31 04:27 PM
                      Crazy CXL Namesanon22022/05/31 04:58 PM
                      Crazy CXL Namesgoose2022/05/31 05:35 PM
                        Crazy CXL NamesPeter Lewis2022/06/03 03:10 AM
                          Reason for Crazy CXL NamesGary Kopp2022/06/24 01:43 PM
                            Reason for Crazy CXL Namesdmcq2022/06/25 11:18 AM
                              Reason for Crazy CXL NamesMichael S2022/06/26 01:30 AM
                                Reason for Crazy CXL NamesDummond D. Slow2022/06/26 06:49 AM
                                  Reason for Crazy CXL NamesMichael S2022/06/26 07:32 AM
                                    Reason for Crazy CXL Namesdmcq2022/06/26 11:54 AM
                                Reason for Crazy CXL Namesanon22022/06/26 03:26 PM
                                  Reason for Crazy CXL NamesEric P2022/07/01 02:48 PM
                                    Reason for Crazy CXL Namesanon22022/07/01 07:56 PM
                                      Reason for Crazy CXL NamesGroo2022/07/02 05:13 AM
                                    Reason for Crazy CXL NamesUngo2022/07/01 11:14 PM
                                      Reason for Crazy CXL NamesEric P2022/07/05 03:21 AM
                      Crazy CXL NamesDoug S2022/06/01 12:44 AM
    Crazy CXL NamesMichael S2022/05/31 01:21 AM
      Crazy CXL Namesanon22022/05/31 02:20 AM
      Crazy CXL NamesPeter Lewis2022/05/31 02:24 AM
        Crazy CXL NamesMichael S2022/05/31 03:07 AM
          Crazy CXL NamesPeter Lewis2022/05/31 04:37 AM
            Current NVidia GPU Launch Latency: 10 microsecondsMark Roulo2022/05/31 01:07 PM
              Current NVidia GPU Launch Latency: 10 microsecondsFreddie2022/06/01 09:44 AM
      Crazy CXL Names---2022/05/31 07:56 PM
        Crazy CXL Namesaaron spink2022/05/31 08:32 PM
Reply to this Topic
Body: No Text
How do you spell tangerine? 🍊