HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

pa-risc1.1 pa-risc2.0

 
SOLVED
Go to solution
jerry1
Super Advisor

pa-risc1.1 pa-risc2.0

What is the difference between
pa-risc1.1 pa-risc2.0? How can I tell which
one I have? I know my servers are not
Itanium processors.
12 REPLIES 12
Torsten.
Acclaimed Contributor
Solution

Re: pa-risc1.1 pa-risc2.0

pa-risc1.1 and pa-risc2.0 are both PA-RISC CPUs.


Go to sam -> performance monitors -> system properties

result can be similar to this:

CPU Version: 1.1e PA7300

this is a PA-7300 CPU pa-risc1.1


Hope this helps!
Regards
Torsten.

__________________________________________________
There are only 10 types of people in the world -
those who understand binary, and those who don't.

__________________________________________________
No support by private messages. Please ask the forum!

If you feel this was helpful please click the KUDOS! thumb below!   
Murat SULUHAN
Honored Contributor

Re: pa-risc1.1 pa-risc2.0

Hi Jerry

http://faqs.org/faqs/hp/hpux-faq/section-285.html

Best Regards
Murat
Murat Suluhan
Ivan Krastev
Honored Contributor

Re: pa-risc1.1 pa-risc2.0

See also this info - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PA-RISC


regards,
ivan
jerry1
Super Advisor

Re: pa-risc1.1 pa-risc2.0

CPU(0) PA8700 3.1

PA-RISC = ??
Sandman!
Honored Contributor

Re: pa-risc1.1 pa-risc2.0

It is a stepwise process to determine the PARISC architecture of the CPU unless you can code it in C. See the example below:

-- Determine the CPU version
# getconf CPU_VERSION
532

-- Convert above decimal value to hexadecimal
# echo 0d532=x | adb
214

-- Match hex value to PARISC version given in the unistd.h file
# grep 0x214 /usr/include/sys/unistd.h
# define CPU_PA_RISC2_0 0x214 /* HP PA-RISC2.0 */

So the above CPU is a PA-RISC 2.0

~hope it helps
Pete Randall
Outstanding Contributor

Re: pa-risc1.1 pa-risc2.0

>>CPU(0) PA8700 3.1

>>PA-RISC = ??

Yes, definitely. The PA in PA8700 gives it away.


Pete

Pete
Murat SULUHAN
Honored Contributor

Re: pa-risc1.1 pa-risc2.0

Hi Jerry

http://ftp.parisc-linux.org/docs/whitepapers/PA-8700wp.pdf

page 4

Sandman, thank you very much for excellent tip

Best Regards
Murat
Murat Suluhan
jerry1
Super Advisor

Re: pa-risc1.1 pa-risc2.0

Wow Sandman, how did you figure that out?

Does ported versions of software for
PA-RISC 1.0 work with PA-RISC 2.0 ?

Thanks guys
Sandman!
Honored Contributor

Re: pa-risc1.1 pa-risc2.0

Look at the manpage of sysconf(2). The stepwise procedure was gleaned from that manpage. It has the information needed to classify the PA-RISC version of the processor.

I would say porting from PARISC 1.0 to PARISC 2.0 should not be a problem owing to backward compatibility but then again this is one of those questions that only HP can provide a definitive answer for.

~hope it helps
Stan Sieler
Respected Contributor

Re: pa-risc1.1 pa-risc2.0

Code compiled for PA-RISC 1.0 (or 1.1)
will run fine on 2.0 in and of itself.

However, you'll usually find that 1.0 or 1.1 code was compiled on an older version of
HP-UX, and HP-UX doesn't have a perfect
record of backward compatibility for
old code running on newer releases.

In other words, try running it :)

We often compile code for 1.1 on HP-UX 11i v2 and ship it to clients with 2.0 systems ... because we also have clients with 1.1 systems on 11i v2 (the 1.1 will run on both, the 2.0 won't run on 1.1 systems).

The performance difference between the 1.1 and 2.0 code is generally negligble. (And, in some cases, 1.1 32-bit is faster than 2.0 64-bit ... your mileage may vary).

Stan
sieler@allegro.com
Sandman!
Honored Contributor

Re: pa-risc1.1 pa-risc2.0

Matter of fact the stepwise procedure can be collapsed into a single pipelined command as follows:

# getconf CPU_VERSION | xargs -i echo 0d{}=x | adb | xargs -i grep 0x{} /usr/include/sys/unistd.h

...and the above will work for both PA-RISC and IPF machines.
Dennis Handly
Acclaimed Contributor

Re: pa-risc1.1 pa-risc2.0

The last supported OS that would produce 1.0 code was 10.10.
Where are you getting your PA 1.0 code?
(Of course you originally said 1.1.)

>Sandman: I would say porting from PA-RISC 1.0 to PA-RISC 2.0 should not be a problem

Yes, this should be forward compatible, unless kernel intrusive.

>Stan: The performance difference between the 1.1 and 2.0 code is generally negligible.

This is not true if doing a lot of shlib calls to small functions.