MorphZone

G4 vs. G5

tlosmx

# 120
Butterfly

Posts: 80 from 2017/9/10

Quote:

Has anybody from A-Eon or Varisys been investigating this since?

reported by me in june 2016.
and reply was "all is all right"

[ Edited by tlosmx 14.09.2017 - 00:54 ]
»14.09.17 - 00:53

Jim

# 121
Yokemate of Keyboards

Posts: 4977 from 2009/1/28

From: Delaware, USA

If this is as good as it gets, there's obviously a significant underlying issue, as the memory itself should provide much higher bandwidth.

And the Qorlq line's focus on network capability, with it deemphasis of serdes connectivity is problematic.
If you were to use the e5500 or e6500 cores in a CPU designed with end user computing devices, you'd probably want to rework some of this to provide better support for other devices.

Still, from the recent benches I have seen Spectre660 post, the overall performance of the X5000 still measures up fairly well.
"Never attribute to malice what can more readily explained by incompetence"
»14.09.17 - 01:59

takemehomegrandma

# 122
Yokemate of Keyboards

Posts: 2720 from 2003/2/24
Quote:

tlosmx wrote:
Quote:

takemehomegrandma wrote:
Well, since the 5040 is essentially pointless (from an "Amiga" perspective), it would have been better to only do *one* board that fully make use of the *5020 specs*. Now they have obviously made compromises to be able to use the same board with a CPU that no Amigan wants or needs.

*5010 have same specs but can be more amigan

So:
1. A Cyrus motherboard designed exclusively for the P5010/P5020 specs, equipped with the cheaper P5010 CPU, would have been the best option for OS4 in regards to price/specs.
2. Instead they used the more expensive P5020, making OS4 users pay extra for a CPU core they have no need or use for.
3. But not only that, the Cyrus board design itself is cripled (being less than what it could have been with 5020/5010) to be able to use the P5040, which is even more expensive and will have *three* unused cores in OS4, thus being even further away from what makes sense for OS4.
IMHO this rymes poorly with the statements that the "AmigaOne X5000 is exclusively built [being an "Amiga"] for OS4"
MorphOS is Amiga done right!
MorphOS NG will be AROS done right!
»14.09.17 - 02:39

tlosmx

# 123
Butterfly

Posts: 80 from 2017/9/10

Quote:

Jim wrote:
If this is as good as it gets, there's obviously a significant underlying issue, as the memory itself should provide much higher bandwidth.

And the Qorlq line's focus on network capability, with it deemphasis of serdes connectivity is problematic.
If you were to use the e5500 or e6500 cores in a CPU designed with end user computing devices, you'd probably want to rework some of this to provide better support for other devices.

Still, from the recent benches I have seen Spectre660 post, the overall performance of the X5000 still measures up fairly well.

x5000/20 dnetc Linux Ubuntu Mate

Quote:

[Jan 10 14:55:02 UTC] Automatic processor type detection did not
[Jan 10 14:55:02 UTC] OGR-NG: Running micro-bench to select fastest core...
[Jan 10 14:55:06 UTC] OGR-NG: using core #0 (KOGE 3.1 Scalar).
[Jan 10 14:55:25 UTC] OGR-NG: Benchmark for core #0 (KOGE 3.1 Scalar)
0.00:00:16.75 [19,861,876 nodes/sec]
[Jan 10 14:55:25 UTC] RC5-72: Running micro-bench to select fastest core...
[Jan 10 14:55:49 UTC] RC5-72: using core #2 (KKS 604e).
[Jan 10 14:56:08 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #2 (KKS 604e)
0.00:00:16.06 [5,574,672 keys/sec]

Quad G5 fedora ppc64
Quote:

[Aug 23 16:52:41 UTC] Automatic processor type detection found
a PowerPC 970MP (G5) processor.
[Aug 23 16:52:41 UTC] OGR-NG: using core #1 (KOGE 3.1 Hybrid).
[Aug 23 16:53:00 UTC] OGR-NG: Benchmark for core #1 (KOGE 3.1 Hybrid)
0.00:00:16.29 [42,505,737 nodes/sec]
[Aug 23 16:53:00 UTC] RC5-72: using core #4 (KKS 7450).
[Aug 23 16:53:21 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #4 (KKS 7450)
0.00:00:17.47 [18,852,434 keys/sec]
(benchmark rates are for a single processor core)
»14.09.17 - 10:54

koszer

# 124
Paladin of the Pegasos

Posts: 1246 from 2004/2/8

From: Poland

Doesn't dnetc use Altivec when possible?
»14.09.17 - 10:59

tlosmx

# 125
Butterfly

Posts: 80 from 2017/9/10

Quote:

koszer wrote:
Doesn't dnetc use Altivec when possible?

yes it use altivec too.
if some one know how to made a benchmark without i will do it
»14.09.17 - 11:13

Jim

# 126
Yokemate of Keyboards

Posts: 4977 from 2009/1/28

From: Delaware, USA

Quote:

takemehomegrandma wrote:
Quote:

Spectre660 wrote:
Jim wanted one.

Hardly as an Amigan. Hardly as a Linux user as well (ARM and x86/x64 offers plenty of better options, whatever you need). He is a PPC fetishist, and it still remains to be seen if he will actually put his money where his mouth is in this matter.

Personally, I doubt it.

It's a lot of money.

Actually, it's not that much money, particularly in light of the prices originally commanded by legacy Amigas.

And I'd never claim to be an Amigan, as that cult is populated by eccentric people who frequently exhibit signs of mental illness.

My original interest was the 68K family of processor, and Motorola CPUs in general, as they were superior to the Intel processors that were available at their introduction, and yes I like RISC, no apologies there.

As to what I will or won't do, I'll continue to support MorphOS, as it's a nice, compact OS with a micro kernel. It's relation to Amiga OS actually isn't that important to me.
SO...I'm a MorphOS user (registered MorphOS user), NOT an Amigan.

Further, when it comes to 'Putting my money where my mouth is'...I do that regularly with bounty donations, contributions of hardware, and contributions to campaigns like the T2080 laptop project.
I don't just offer my opinion, grandma, like some of us.

SO, it might be time to remind you all of how easy it is to be a critic, without also offering anything positive as a counterpoint.

I know a few of you have taken offense to some of the things Andreas has posted, but you know, I think HE is always balanced, fair, and most importantly factual.
So, using that as an example, I've tried to follow his lead (not always succeeding).

Finally, I'm not here to offer anyone advice or act as a model for your emulation. I would not recommend you buy (or not buy) hardware based on my own preferences. My interests in our pursuits is primarily from a hobbyist's perspective, and I don't feel constrained by practicality.
"Never attribute to malice what can more readily explained by incompetence"
»14.09.17 - 11:34

tlosmx

# 127
Butterfly

Posts: 80 from 2017/9/10

Quote:

And I'd never claim to be an Amigan, as that cult is populated by eccentric people who frequently exhibit signs of mental illness.

i quote they are made negation of evidences...
»14.09.17 - 12:22

tlosmx

# 128
Butterfly

Posts: 80 from 2017/9/10

Quote:

tlosmx wrote:
Quote:

koszer wrote:
Doesn't dnetc use Altivec when possible?

yes it use altivec too.
if some one know how to made a benchmark without i will do it

i benchmarked all cores with -bench option
i dont know if it is good . i will do the same on 5040 when i will have the time to go in my mancave

Quote:

dnetc v2.9112-521-CFR-16021317 for Linux (Linux 4.10.1).
Please provide the *entire* version descriptor when submitting bug reports.
The distributed.net bug report pages are at http://bugs.distributed.net/

[Sep 14 11:28:23 UTC] Automatic processor type detection found
a PowerPC 970MP (G5) processor.
[Sep 14 11:28:23 UTC] OGR-NG: using core #0 (KOGE 3.1 Scalar).
[Sep 14 11:28:42 UTC] OGR-NG: Benchmark for core #0 (KOGE 3.1 Scalar)
0.00:00:16.17 [22,497,333 nodes/sec]
[Sep 14 11:28:42 UTC] OGR-NG: using core #1 (KOGE 3.1 Hybrid).
[Sep 14 11:29:01 UTC] OGR-NG: Benchmark for core #1 (KOGE 3.1 Hybrid)
0.00:00:16.17 [42,424,383 nodes/sec]
[Sep 14 11:29:01 UTC] OGR-NG benchmark summary :
Default core : #1 (KOGE 3.1 Hybrid) 42,424,383 nodes/sec
Fastest core : #1 (KOGE 3.1 Hybrid) 42,424,383 nodes/sec
[Sep 14 11:29:01 UTC] RC5-72: using core #0 (MH 2-pipe).
[Sep 14 11:29:20 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #0 (MH 2-pipe)
0.00:00:16.34 [5,648,705 keys/sec]
[Sep 14 11:29:20 UTC] RC5-72: using core #1 (KKS 2-pipe).
[Sep 14 11:29:39 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #1 (KKS 2-pipe)
0.00:00:17.09 [6,132,322 keys/sec]
[Sep 14 11:29:39 UTC] RC5-72: using core #2 (KKS 604e).
[Sep 14 11:29:59 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #2 (KKS 604e)
0.00:00:17.07 [5,593,755 keys/sec]
[Sep 14 11:29:59 UTC] RC5-72: using core #3 (KKS 7400).
[Sep 14 11:30:19 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #3 (KKS 7400)
0.00:00:17.07 [15,767,442 keys/sec]
[Sep 14 11:30:19 UTC] RC5-72: using core #4 (KKS 7450).
[Sep 14 11:30:39 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #4 (KKS 7450)
0.00:00:17.06 [18,846,672 keys/sec]
[Sep 14 11:30:39 UTC] RC5-72: using core #5 (MH 1-pipe).
[Sep 14 11:30:58 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #5 (MH 1-pipe)
0.00:00:17.06 [4,759,204 keys/sec]
[Sep 14 11:30:58 UTC] RC5-72: using core #6 (MH 1-pipe 604e).
[Sep 14 11:31:17 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #6 (MH 1-pipe 604e)
0.00:00:16.10 [4,743,695 keys/sec]
[Sep 14 11:31:17 UTC] RC5-72 benchmark summary :
Default core : #4 (KKS 7450) 18,846,672 keys/sec
Fastest core : #4 (KKS 7450) 18,846,672 keys/sec
[Sep 14 11:31:17 UTC] Compare and share your rates in the speeds database at
http://www.distributed.net/speed/
(benchmark rates are for a single processor core)
»14.09.17 - 12:32

Jim

# 129
Yokemate of Keyboards

Posts: 4977 from 2009/1/28

From: Delaware, USA

Quote:

tlosmx wrote:
Quote:

And I'd never claim to be an Amigan, as that cult is populated by eccentric people who frequently exhibit signs of mental illness.

i quote they are made negation of evidences...

I'm not sure I get that.
But I stand by my contention that the Amiga community at large has an unusually large percentage of what can most kindly be called 'odd personalities'.

As far as 'negation of evidences', so far the only 'evidence' I've seen are some low benchmarks for memory bandwidth.
Other than that, you've posted a great deal of subjective impressions.

Further, this isn't really a contest between the X5000 and the quad G5, as the only OS they have in common is Linux.
And I will agree with grandma here that I am not a big Linux fan.
Linux uses a monolythic kernel, and I don't find that ideal.
If I'm going to compromise and use an OS based on one of those, I'll just use Windows, as it's SO much less of a PITA.

So, again, I'll use Amiga OS, and Linux, BUT I'm NOT a fan.
I'm a MorphOS user.
"Never attribute to malice what can more readily explained by incompetence"
»14.09.17 - 12:56

tlosmx

# 130
Butterfly

Posts: 80 from 2017/9/10

Quote:

Jim wrote:
Quote:

tlosmx wrote:
Quote:

And I'd never claim to be an Amigan, as that cult is populated by eccentric people who frequently exhibit signs of mental illness.

i quote they are made negation of evidences...

I'm not sure I get that.
But I stand by my contention that the Amiga community at large has an unusually large percentage of what can most kindly be called 'odd personalities'.

As far as 'negation of evidences', so far the only 'evidence' I've seen are some low benchmarks for memory bandwidth.
Other than that, you've posted a great deal of subjective impressions.

Further, this isn't really a contest between the X5000 and the quad G5, as the only OS they have in common is Linux.
And I will agree with grandma here that I am not a big Linux fan.
Linux uses a monolythic kernel, and I don't find that ideal.
If I'm going to compromise and use an OS based on one of those, I'll just use Windows, as it's SO much less of a PITA.

So, again, I'll use Amiga OS, and Linux, BUT I'm NOT a fan.
I'm a MorphOS user.

Quote:

I'm a MorphOS user.

im not morphos big fan, i appreciate it optimization and how much it is responsive.i like it but for sure i will love it when will be on quad with smp
i start appreciate linux when i found a great alternative of osx on my Quad and from that time i start studing it.

this are couples of my morphos videos hope you will like it. was made from two of my machines.
the best machine for me was and continue be the Pegasos2 ...
Im my life i try to be more objective possible.

video 1
video 2

edit: about my x5000 consideration be sure of one thing this machine cant be paragonable in nothing to the performance of g5 quad. and what made this machine a really not good desktop experience is the slow ram. with a faster ram speed im sure everything can be much more better every ware. And ram speed cant be fixed . belive me

[ Edited by tlosmx 14.09.2017 - 13:49 ]
»14.09.17 - 13:41

Jim

# 131
Yokemate of Keyboards

Posts: 4977 from 2009/1/28

From: Delaware, USA

Well, the X5000 ought to outperform a Peg2. Even the low memory bandwidth figures you've quoted for the X5000 compare favorably to a G4.
And the integer performance would definitely be higher, floating point would not have AltiVec, but at almost twice the speed that would also be better.
Then there is a video slot differences.
Even limited to four lanes a Gen2 PCI-E connection is going to provide better bandwidth than the modified PCI slot that the Peg2 uses for AGP.
And the X5000's PCI-E slot can handle modern Radeon HD video cards which the Peg2 can not.
In fact, TBMK the Peg2 tops out with the Radeon 9800 as it cannot use cards intended for 4x/8x AGP slots (it provides too high a voltage to the AGP slot).
So while MorphOS support AGP variants of the R400 and R500 video cards (and may eventually provide support for R600 and R700 AGP cards), these can never be used in a Pegasos.

So, while I have a strong affinity for the Peg2 as a native MorphOS platform, my G4 system is a PowerMac MDD.
It's faster, has an AGP slot I can force 8x AGP card to work in (by masking two pins), and they are dirt cheap (as well as commonly available).

I agree with you that the Quad G5 would make a good MorphOS platform, but there has been no commitment to port to that system.
And a port is being prepared for the X5000.
So, while an X5000 isn't a G5, it is better than a G4, it has PCI-E expansion, and it's available new.

And the price isn't that unreasonable, considering the price of a new Mac or the Lenovo laptops I buy.

[ Edited by Jim 14.09.2017 - 10:56 ]
"Never attribute to malice what can more readily explained by incompetence"
»14.09.17 - 14:46

tlosmx

# 132
Butterfly

Posts: 80 from 2017/9/10

Quote:

Jim wrote:
Well, the X5000 ought to outperform a Peg2.

this is for sure, but the peg2 for me was the best machine made in the amigang hystory.
probably because made by bplan (phase5)?,
i like the good choose of open firmware, the cpu book3s and the perfect compatibily.
the cpu can be upgraded, plus was ready for a dual core module.
»14.09.17 - 18:02

Jim

# 133
Yokemate of Keyboards

Posts: 4977 from 2009/1/28

From: Delaware, USA

Quote:

tlosmx wrote:
Quote:

Jim wrote:
Well, the X5000 ought to outperform a Peg2.

this is for sure, but the peg2 for me was the best machine made in the amigang hystory.
probably because made by bplan (phase5)?,
i like the good choose of open firmware, the cpu book3s and the perfect compatibily.
the cpu can be upgraded, plus was ready for a dual core module.

Yes, I agree that bPlan hardware had it all over the stuff that was carrying the AmigaOne banner, and the Peg2 got rid of the Artica S, the weak point of early AmigaOne and Peg1 boards.

I was hoping I could draw Bill Buck back into the community for a final PPC board project, as he still has access to those production facilities, but lack of enthusiasm for the project on Freescale's part helped torpedo that.

But the Pegasos2 was a high point for our community.
Open firmware, an upgradable CPU board, and eventually the design details were released to the public.
"Never attribute to malice what can more readily explained by incompetence"
»14.09.17 - 18:41

Andreas_Wolf

# 134
Yokemate of Keyboards

Posts: 12073 from 2003/5/22

From: Germany

> yes it use altivec too. if some one know how to made a benchmark without i will do it

By default, dnetc should run both scalar and vector benchmarks on CPUs with SIMD, and just the scalar ones on CPUs without SIMD.

dnetc comparison between pampers' X5000/20 and my PowerMac G5 2.3 GHz (=1.00), both with MorphOS (real ratio first, then scaled per-clock ratio):

0.99 | 1.14 : KOGE 3.1 Scalar
1.05 | 1.20 : MH 2-pipe
0.98 | 1.13 : KKS 2-pipe
1.10 | 1.27 : KKS 604e
1.22 | 1.40 : MH 1-pipe
1.20 | 1.38 : MH 1-pipe 604e

http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=11&topic_id=11137&start=593
»14.09.17 - 22:29

Andreas_Wolf

# 135
Yokemate of Keyboards

Posts: 12073 from 2003/5/22

From: Germany

>> KOGE 3.1 Scalar [...] 19,861,876 nodes/sec
>> KKS 604e [...] 5,574,672 keys/sec

> KOGE 3.1 Scalar [...] 22,497,333 nodes/sec
> KKS 604e [...] 5,593,755 keys/sec

2.5 GHz PPC970MP (=1.00) vs. 2.0 GHz P5020 (real ratio | scaled per-clock ratio):
0.90 | 1.12 : KOGE 3.1 Scalar
0.95 | 1.19 : MH 2-pipe
0.89 | 1.12 : KKS 2-pipe
1.00 | 1.25 : KKS 604e
1.11 | 1.38 : MH 1-pipe
1.09 | 1.36 : MH 1-pipe 604e

2.5 GHz PPC970MP (=1.00) vs. 2.2 GHz P5040 (real ratio | scaled per-clock ratio):
0.99 | 1.12 : KOGE 3.1 Scalar
1.05 | 1.20 : MH 2-pipe
0.99 | 1.12 : KKS 2-pipe
1.11 | 1.26 : KKS 604e
1.22 | 1.39 : MH 1-pipe
1.20 | 1.37 : MH 1-pipe 604e

Unsurprisingly, your scaled per-clock ratios are similar to my results (see previous comment). Yours are slightly lower because your PPC970MP is slightly faster per clock than my PPC970FX.

Edit: used more complete figures

[ Edited by Andreas_Wolf 23.09.2017 - 21:47 ]
»14.09.17 - 22:58

Andreas_Wolf

# 136
Yokemate of Keyboards

Posts: 12073 from 2003/5/22

From: Germany

> the peg2 for me was the best machine made in the amigang hystory. [...]
> the cpu can be upgraded

Upgraded to what? Maybe buyers of the cheaper 600 MHz G3 model could upgrade to 1 GHz G4, but CPU modules weren't retailed, so they had to search the secondhand market and hope for G4 users with broken mainboards. There was a handful of 1.4 GHz G4 modules produced but not openly sold.

> plus was ready for a dual core module.

Never existed.
»14.09.17 - 23:40

Andreas_Wolf

# 137
Yokemate of Keyboards

Posts: 12073 from 2003/5/22

From: Germany

> a few of you have taken offense to some of the things Andreas has posted

Huh? What have I missed? :-)
»14.09.17 - 23:56

Jim

# 138
Yokemate of Keyboards

Posts: 4977 from 2009/1/28

From: Delaware, USA

Quote:

Andreas_Wolf wrote:
> a few of you have taken offense to some of the things Andreas has posted

Huh? What have I missed?

I think some people find your direct manner off-putting. 😁

I have always found you well informed and unwilling to compromise principles.

That is important to me.
And you're a great resource for info.
"Never attribute to malice what can more readily explained by incompetence"
»15.09.17 - 00:04

Andreas_Wolf

# 139
Yokemate of Keyboards

Posts: 12073 from 2003/5/22

From: Germany

> so far the only 'evidence' I've seen are some low benchmarks for memory
> bandwidth. [...] this isn't really a contest between the X5000 and the quad G5,
> as the only OS they have in common is Linux.

As you know, the Cyrus/X5000 memory performance doesn't come off significantly better if compared to AGP-based G5 PowerMacs with benchmarks completely done on MorphOS.

> monolythic kernel [...] I don't find that ideal. If I'm going to [...] use an OS based
> on one of those, I'll just use Windows

"the kernel performs almost all the tasks of a traditional microkernel; the strict distinction between Executive and Kernel is the most prominent remnant of the original microkernel design, and historical design documentation consistently refers to the kernel component as "the microkernel"."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architecture_of_Windows_NT#Kernel

;-)
»15.09.17 - 00:09

Andreas_Wolf

# 140
Yokemate of Keyboards

Posts: 12073 from 2003/5/22

From: Germany

> ram speed cant be fixed . belive me

So you already know it's not an U-Boot issue?
»15.09.17 - 00:17

Jim

# 141
Yokemate of Keyboards

Posts: 4977 from 2009/1/28

From: Delaware, USA

Quote:

Andreas_Wolf wrote:
> so far the only 'evidence' I've seen are some low benchmarks for memory
> bandwidth. [...] this isn't really a contest between the X5000 and the quad G5,
> as the only OS they have in common is Linux.

As you know, the Cyrus/X5000 memory performance doesn't come off significantly better if compared to AGP-based G5 PowerMacs with benchmarks completely done on MorphOS.

> monolythic kernel [...] I don't find that ideal. If I'm going to [...] use an OS based
> on one of those, I'll just use Windows

"the kernel performs almost all the tasks of a traditional microkernel; the strict distinction between Executive and Kernel is the most prominent remnant of the original microkernel design, and historical design documentation consistently refers to the kernel component as "the microkernel"."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architecture_of_Windows_NT#Kernel

Interesting quote.
There was a period, about the time CDi was trying to make headway, that Microsoft was rumored to be thinking about shifting toward a micro kernel based OS. And OSX has a curious hybrid core in Mach.
Linux actually seems the most primitive in that it's kernel was become a monster.

IF someone took the idea serious, MorphOS (or something based on it) could actually be upgraded to compete with these operating systems.
"Never attribute to malice what can more readily explained by incompetence"
»15.09.17 - 00:40

Andreas_Wolf

# 142
Yokemate of Keyboards

Posts: 12073 from 2003/5/22

From: Germany

> almost twice the speed

The X5000/20 clocks exactly twice as high as the Pegasos II G4, and the X5000/40 even higher :-)

> the modified PCI slot that the Peg2 uses for AGP.

Actually, the slot is a genuine AGP one. What's PCI(-X) in disguise is the connection from the Marvell northbridge to the slot :-)

> the Quad G5 would make a good MorphOS platform, but there has been
> no commitment to port to that system.

As has been reported in this forum, MorphOS was already shown on PowerMac11,2. There may be no commitment to release that (still unfinished) port, though.

http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=11381&start=33
http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=11381&start=42

> a port is being prepared for the X5000.

I think that port is ready. It's just other parts of MorphOS 3.10 that are still being prepared before release.
»15.09.17 - 01:05

Andreas_Wolf

# 143
Yokemate of Keyboards

Posts: 12073 from 2003/5/22

From: Germany

>>> a few of you have taken offense to some of the things Andreas has posted

>> Huh? What have I missed? :-)

> I think some people find your direct manner off-putting.

Honestly, I'm not quite sure what warrants making me into a subject of this thread out of nowhere. This thread has been about "G4 vs. G5" originally and quickly turned into a thread about the Cyrus/X5000. I've been trying to clear some misunderstandings and questions in this thread, in particular with regards to the Cyrus board design, by offering technical information. I can't remember anybody has taken offense to anything of that, quite to the contrary.
»15.09.17 - 01:25

Andreas_Wolf

# 144
Yokemate of Keyboards

Posts: 12073 from 2003/5/22

From: Germany

> OSX has a curious hybrid core in Mach.

Yes, Mach/OSFMK is the low-level microkernel part of the hybrid XNU kernel (with the FreeBSD kernel delivering the higher-level monolithic part).
»15.09.17 - 01:37