*hurm* Well if it is the case that some dev at freescale has assumed that producing binaries in a certain way that makes sense for the coldfire series ( which might resemble the original enough to make it seem sensible ) might explain the slowdown were seeing _across the line_ ( be it amigaos linux or fuckos).
Bernd Roesch ( now included weather he likes it or not, sorry :) has also made remarks and comparisons about this. As has the amigaos dev's of ffmpeg, which has made it bleeding clear in the posts linked to before http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=47991&highlight=ffmpeg+slowdown So no the slowdown from 333,340 to 4xx is not only amigaos, its clearly visible booting the linux kernel too ... . 2009/9/5 mike <[email protected]>: > The thing is, its been proven that gcc produces slower and slower 68k > binaries, its probably not the linker in binutils at all > see. > http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?p=519318 > and ( not 100% sure if its the correct thread, but the natami team > have noticed the issue > http://www.natami.net/knowledge.php?b=3¬e=2&z=9M0ieT > > Including Gunnar Von Boehn in this now, cause they've done alot more > research, and can probably fill in what freescale have, and havent > done. I suspect they have been tweaking the code for newer "68k's" or > coldfires, rather than branching it off? > > Cheers > -Spike > > 2009/9/5 Stephen R Marenka <[email protected]>: >> On Sat, Sep 05, 2009 at 01:43:14AM +1000, Finn Thain wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, 1 Sep 2009, Stephen R Marenka wrote: >>> >>> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 12:16:27AM +0200, mike wrote: >>> > > Btw, i noticed an error >>> > > http://people.debian.org/~smarenka/d-i/m68k/images/daily/build_nativehd.log >>> > > E: Couldn't find package libnss-dns-udeb >>> > > make[2]: *** [stamps/get_udebs-nativehd-stamp] Error 100 >>> > > make[1]: *** [_build] Error 2 >>> > > make: *** [build_nativehd] Error 2 >>> > >>> > Yep. debian-installer dailies are now *dead* until we get a modern libc >>> > working. >>> >>> I wonder whether there are debian source packages for binutils, gcc and >>> glibc having TLS/NPTL support for m68k. >> >> I'd be surprised if that were the case. >> >>> The patches posted to the binutils mailing list are incomplete. The >>> binutils patch at >>> http://people.debian.org/~smarenka/m68k/tls/ >>> is broken according to Kolla: >>> http://lists.debian.org/debian-68k/2009/07/msg00001.html >>> >>> But in that post (June 28) Maxim recommends using mainline binutils, and >>> since then we have HJL binutils-2.19.51.0.14 released, "...based on >>> binutils 2009 0722 in CVS on sourceware.org..." So I guess I should start >>> there. >>> >>> 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 >>> Presumably not this one? >>> http://people.debian.org/~smarenka/m68k/tls/gcc_patch2 >>> (and gcc_patch1 is clearly broken... perhaps it was actually the same >>> thing before being mangled... Stephen, I don't think this "/tls" directory >>> is helping any.) >> >> Shall I remove it then? >> >>> Or perhaps there is a known-good gcc 4.5 snapshot (FWIW, I'd much rather >>> patch a debian compiler instead, which means 4.4 or preferably older.) >> >> It would be wonderful to have debian gcc 4.4 building on m68k. It >> never has. >> >>> As for eglibc, there are a number of branches listed here, >>> http://www.eglibc.org/repository >>> The question is, which branch, snapshot or release might meet be suitable? >>> >>> With this information, I could attempt to build a toolchain from upstream >>> sources, or figure out whether or not the debian archive has the necessary >>> source packages... >> >> The life is fast ebbing from debian/m68k as far as I can tell. I'm not >> sure if there is sufficient energy to revitalize it. I'd be delighted to >> be proven wrong. >> >> Peace, >> >> Stephen >> >> -- >> Stephen R. Marenka If life's not fun, you're not doing it right! >> <[email protected]> >> -- >> 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
