[Beowulf] Not OT, but a quick link to an article on InsideHPC
pbisbal at pppl.gov
Fri Mar 24 11:08:33 PDT 2017
Thanks for clarifying the difference between EKOPath/Path64 and
Pathscale. I probably meant to say Path64 and not Open64.
So are you saying the pathscale.com site has been up consistently, and
is still up? I've been trying to get there for months, originally to see
what the latest version of your compiler was and update our installation
the latest version if necessary, and then I kept checking to see if you
were still in business. I still can't get there today. I've tried from
work, home, etc. I can't get there right now, in fact. I type in
"pathscale.com" in the address bar of Firefox, and just get a spinning
wheel in the tab and the text "Connecting..." If pathscale,com is still
up, I'd be happy to work with you to trouble shoot this problem.
I was able to get to some sort of customer login portal, but not the
main pathscale.com site. This is why I thought Pathscale was already out
of business, and how I stumbled on that post for whatever open source
compiler that was.
Lead Software Engineer
Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory
On 03/24/2017 11:56 AM, C Bergström wrote:
> Total bullshit - The website has been down a few times, but they were
> things like a server restart mishape and people errors. I'm letting
> the site go down now so people realize I'm serious about this.
> I generally have very little or nothing to do with Open64. That is/was
> a semi-hostile group of people whom I didn't want much interaction
> with at all. Open64 is/was dead and maybe you mistook my words as
> PathScale when what I meant was that Open64 is dead to me and I wanted
> nothing to do with them.
> Clarification on open source - We made EKOPath (Not ENZO) fully open
> source from 2009-2012. It was done under the path64 naming to avoid
> confusion with our EKOPath brand. The code was (I've pulled it)
> available on github and anyone could download and build it. The amount
> of people who cared seemed to be so small and the confusion in
> answering questions just wasn't worth it. In 2012 we decided just to
> switch back to a closed model for both EKOPath and ENZO.
> I realize we may be quiet and not dancing around posting bs marketing,
> but I can assure you me and the small army of engineers working on the
> compiler are quite alive. At peak we had 25 people working on the
> compiler and other connected things. (This is btw more than "old"
> PathScale had in terms of compiler people)
> Sorry if my tone is wrong, but I do appreciate the feedback.
> Some things we've done
> * OpenACC across CPU/GPU (ARMv8, Power8, AMD dGPU, AMD APU and NVIDIA)
> * OpenMP4 ...
> Tons of work on top of clang/llvm infrastructure to fix it's complete
> deficiency in the "high" level optimization catagories. All the
> multicore/GPU optimizations which are needed for autopar, autogpu and
> OpenACC (which puts a lot of pressure on the compiler)
> KNC hardware wasn't all that great, but we wrote a micro OS/firmware
> that replaced the bloated thing from Intel and exposed an interface
> similar to a GPU (open source)
> We've got a semi-experimental IDE which tightly couples clang+compiler
> backend for showing users what's being optimized and what's not..
> In recent years we've done work for several national labs, AMD, Cavium
> and others... (Not to mention other products we've done which are very
> specific to some aerospace customers)...
> In honesty - traditional EKOPath customers may be disappointed because
> all this work focuses on what I think is value for the future and not
> immediate value for Intel centric world. Actually in hindsight, I
> should have just had our core business go battle against Intel on
> common benchmarks. If we're a "SPEC" compiler then people would
> actually care..
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 11:40 PM, Prentice Bisbal <pbisbal at pppl.gov> wrote:
>> Don't take this the wrong way, but I thought Pathscale closed shop a long
>> time ago. We license Pathscale here, and I haven't been able to access the
>> pathscale.com website for months, so I assumed you closed shop a long time
>> ago. Googling for information on the current state of Pathscale, I came
>> across a post on a Open64 mailing list/forum that made it sound like
>> Pathscale had tried to open source the compiler, failed, and went out of
>> business. That post was from someone withing the company (you?). I can try
>> to find the post in question if interested, but it would probably take some
>> On 03/23/2017 05:27 PM, C Bergström wrote:
>>> Tiz the season for HPC software to die?
>>> (sorry I don't mean to hijack your thread, but timing of both
>>> announcements is quite overlapping)
>>> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 5:16 AM, Joe Landman <joe.landman at gmail.com>
>>>> For those who I've not talked with yet ...
>>>> Joe Landman
>>>> e: joe.landman at gmail.com
>>>> t: @hpcjoe
>>>> c: +1 734 612 4615
>>>> w: https://scalability.org
>>>> Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org sponsored by Penguin Computing
>>>> To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit
>>> Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org sponsored by Penguin Computing
>>> To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit
>> Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org sponsored by Penguin Computing
>> To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit
More information about the Beowulf