Hey, Well i formatted a ffs partition and if found the image, but the paritioner doesnt correctly read the disk table or something, i can mount individual paritions trough /dev/discs/ide/... and even formatted the three partions freed for linux... But they still dont show up. . Any ideas?
-Mike 2009/9/22 Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]>: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 16:51, mike <[email protected]> wrote: >>> 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 > > Linux can't read SFS/PFS. > >> Are there any other VM's i could use to install linux 68k? > > ARAnyM? > >> 2009/9/22 Finn Thain <[email protected]>: >>> >>> >>> 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 <[email protected]>: >>>> > >>>> > On Sun, 13 Sep 2009, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: >>>> > >>>> >> [email protected] 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 [email protected] >>>> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >>>> > >>>> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in >> the body of a message to [email protected] >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> > > > > -- > Gr{oetje,eeting}s, > > Geert > > -- > Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- > [email protected] > > In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But > when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like > that. > -- Linus Torvalds > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
