Re: benchmarks, was Re: toolchain
> These benchmarks aren't for linux, right?
Nope, thats amiga c
I see umisef made a mac version , but i cant see a link to it anywhere.
For some reason, probably due to the way amigaos 3.9 has configured
the hd i cant mount, or read SFS partitions from linux, so im dead in
the water as far as linux on the amiga goes, either that or modules
are missing.. Seemed like none were loaded according to lsmod .. I
need to install from a image on the hard drive.. So i cant test until
i figure that out. And i couldnt get it running in e-uae. If i could
get that running, i might be able to stuff the hd in the pc and dd a
partition.
Are there any other VM's i could use to install linux 68k?
2009/9/22 Finn Thain <fthain@telegraphics.com.au>:
>
>
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009, mike wrote:
>
>> Seems im not the only soul feeling the bloat
>> http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10358024-16.html
>>
>> I havent seen any 68k linux benchmarks for this yet
>> http://cshandley.co.uk/temp/membench/
>> http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=29569&forum=14
>
> These benchmarks aren't for linux, right?
>
>>
>> It would be interesting if someone could compare a binary compiled with
>> gcc 2.95 to 3.33 3.40 and or 4.4 for linux, on various systems even. To
>> see if the slowdown has any consistency.
>
> If you would like to run some linux benchmarks, I could build the latest
> kernel using several different compilers for you. I'd need a kernel config
> to suit your hardware though.
>
> But if you want to compare different compilers using benchmarks for a
> different operating system, I can't help with that. You may have more luck
> with that on the relevant mailing list or forum.
>
> Finn
>
>>
>> -Mike
>>
>>
>> 2009/9/14 <fthain@telegraphics.com.au>:
>> >
>> > On Sun, 13 Sep 2009, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>> >
>> >> fthain@telegraphics.com.au wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > On Sat, 5 Sep 2009, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Finn Thain wrote: ...
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > I understand that the current GCC (4.4) lacks the necessary
>> >> > > > patches, and 4.5 is still uncooked (and that's a scary prospect).
>> >> > > > Can someone confirm that this is the necessary patch for 4.4:
>> >> > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-05/msg01024.html
>> >> > > I think GCC 4.4 should be good enough.
>> >> >
>> >> > I tried patching 4.4.1 and the patch was rejected. It expects
>> >> > m68k_legitimize_address() to have been declared and defined, but that
>> >> > routine isn't in gcc-4.4.
>> >>
>> >> m68k.c:m68k_legitimize_address() was macro m68k.h:LEGITIMIZE_ADDRESS(),
>> >> you need to move the hunk to m68k.h.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Thanks for the tip.
>> >
>> > Here's a second cut. This one removes the m68k_tls_symbol_p() routine and
>> > inlines that logic in the LEGITIMIZE_ADDRESS macro (avoids a reference to
>> > m68k_tls_symbol_p() from explow.o). The TARGET_HAVE_TLS macro wasn't
>> > defined in explow.c so I changed it to HAVE_AS_TLS.
>> >
>> > It appears to work, but I won't be able to test any binary produced by
>> > this compiler for a week or so.
>> >
>> > Finn
>> >
>> >
>> > --- gcc-m68k-support-for-tls.patch 2009-09-14 15:11:39.893286532 +1000
>> > +++ gcc-m68k-support-for-tls-backport.patch 2009-09-14 15:11:34.563287784 +1000
>> > @@ -574,13 +574,7 @@
>> >
>> > enum reg_class regno_reg_class[] =
>> > {
>> > -@@ -143,11 +144,13 @@ static tree m68k_handle_fndecl_attribute
>> > - static void m68k_compute_frame_layout (void);
>> > - static bool m68k_save_reg (unsigned int regno, bool interrupt_handler);
>> > - static bool m68k_ok_for_sibcall_p (tree, tree);
>> > -+static bool m68k_tls_symbol_p (rtx);
>> > - static rtx m68k_legitimize_address (rtx, rtx, enum machine_mode);
>> > - static bool m68k_rtx_costs (rtx, int, int, int *, bool);
>> > +@@ -146,6 +147,7 @@ static tree m68k_handle_fndecl_attribute
>> > #if M68K_HONOR_TARGET_STRICT_ALIGNMENT
>> > static bool m68k_return_in_memory (const_tree, const_tree);
>> > #endif
>> > @@ -613,16 +607,6 @@
>> > && crtl->uses_pic_offset_table)
>> > insn = emit_insn (gen_load_got (pic_offset_table_rtx));
>> > }
>> > -@@ -1431,6 +1441,9 @@ m68k_legitimize_sibcall_address (rtx x)
>> > - rtx
>> > - m68k_legitimize_address (rtx x, rtx oldx, enum machine_mode mode)
>> > - {
>> > -+ if (m68k_tls_symbol_p (x))
>> > -+ return m68k_legitimize_tls_address (x);
>> > -+
>> > - if (GET_CODE (x) == PLUS)
>> > - {
>> > - int ch = (x) != (oldx);
>> > @@ -1849,7 +1862,7 @@ m68k_illegitimate_symbolic_constant_p (r
>> > && !offset_within_block_p (base, INTVAL (offset)))
>> > return true;
>> > @@ -957,7 +941,7 @@
>> > return orig;
>> >
>> > gcc_assert (reg);
>> > -@@ -2196,13 +2421,257 @@ legitimize_pic_address (rtx orig, enum m
>> > +@@ -2196,13 +2421,244 @@ legitimize_pic_address (rtx orig, enum m
>> > base == reg ? 0 : reg);
>> >
>> > if (GET_CODE (orig) == CONST_INT)
>> > @@ -1164,19 +1148,6 @@
>> > + return orig;
>> > +}
>> > +
>> > -+/* Return true if X is a TLS symbol. */
>> > -+
>> > -+static bool
>> > -+m68k_tls_symbol_p (rtx x)
>> > -+{
>> > -+ if (!TARGET_HAVE_TLS)
>> > -+ return false;
>> > -+
>> > -+ if (GET_CODE (x) != SYMBOL_REF)
>> > -+ return false;
>> > -+
>> > -+ return SYMBOL_REF_TLS_MODEL (x) != 0;
>> > -+}
>> > +
>> > +/* Helper for m68k_tls_referenced_p. */
>> > +
>> > @@ -1414,6 +1385,18 @@
>> >
>> > #define REG_OK_FOR_BASE_P(X) \
>> > m68k_legitimate_base_reg_p (X, REG_STRICT_P)
>> > +@@ -777,7 +778,10 @@ __transfer_from_trampoline () \
>> > + #define COPY_ONCE(Y) if (!copied) { Y = copy_rtx (Y); copied = ch = 1; }
>> > + #define LEGITIMIZE_ADDRESS(X,OLDX,MODE,WIN) \
>> > + { register int ch = (X) != (OLDX); \
>> > +- if (GET_CODE (X) == PLUS) \
>> > ++ if (HAVE_AS_TLS && (GET_CODE (X) == SYMBOL_REF) && \
>> > ++ (SYMBOL_REF_TLS_MODEL (X) != 0)) \
>> > ++ m68k_legitimize_tls_address (X); \
>> > ++ else if (GET_CODE (X) == PLUS) \
>> > + { int copied = 0; \
>> > + if (GET_CODE (XEXP (X, 0)) == MULT) \
>> > + { COPY_ONCE (X); XEXP (X, 0) = force_operand (XEXP (X, 0), 0);} \
>> > @@ -974,6 +975,9 @@ do { if (cc_prev_status.flags & CC_IN_68
>> > assemble_name ((FILE), (NAME)), \
>> > fprintf ((FILE), ",%u\n", (int)(ROUNDED)))
>> > --
>> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in
>> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>> >
>>
Reply to: