Thanks, Esteban, that works:

pi@raspberrypi ~/Pharo $ ./pharo-arm-vm/pharo --version
5.0-201610181220  Tue Oct 18 14:42:58 UTC 2016 gcc 4.9.2 [Production Spur VM]
CoInterpreter VMMaker.oscog-rsf.1951 uuid: c714858a-7f63-47bd-a9ec-4bc1350eead2 
Oct 18 2016
StackToRegisterMappingCogit VMMaker.oscog-rsf.1951 uuid: 
c714858a-7f63-47bd-a9ec-4bc1350eead2 Oct 18 2016
VM: 201610181220 https://github.com/estebanlm/opensmalltalk-vm.git $ Date: Tue 
Oct 18 14:20:17 2016 +0200 $
Plugins: 201610181220 https://github.com/estebanlm/opensmalltalk-vm.git $
Linux testing-gce-a8263b5d-fc45-4502-a6e9-cbf3483c9374 4.4.0-42-generic 
#62~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Fri Oct 7 23:15:48 UTC 2016 armv7l GNU/Linux
plugin path: /home/pi/Pharo/pharo-arm-vm/ [default: 
/home/pi/Pharo/pharo-arm-vm/]

pi@raspberrypi ~/Pharo $ ./pharo-arm-vm/pharo -vm-display-null Pharo.image 
printVersion
[version] 5.0 #50581

pi@raspberrypi ~/Pharo $ ./pharo-arm-vm/pharo -vm-display-null Pharo.image eval 
'1 tinyBenchmarks'
'167210973 bytecodes/sec; 11337746 sends/sec'

Speed is similar to what I got before 160M bytecodes/s, 11M sends/s

Maybe all the VMs that I tried before were all Cog VMs ?

Is there still a stack VM (PharoS for ARM, 5.0) ?

> On 18 Oct 2016, at 22:56, Esteban Lorenzano <esteba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Sven, 
> 
> this vm: pharo-linux-i386.7237aa8.zip
> 
> should work. Name is bad but is an ARMv6 VM… did you tried it?
> 
> Esteban
> 
>> On 18 Oct 2016, at 22:50, Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On 18 Oct 2016, at 22:16, Todd Blanchard <tblanch...@mac.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> There is a scratch on cog vm as part of the standard raspbian distro.
>>> 
>>> Have you tried that?
>> 
>> The Squeak VMs that come with raspbian seem to be of the older variant (I am 
>> using Pharo 5).
>> 
>> You known, "This interpreter (vers. 6505) cannot read image file (vers. 
>> 6521)."
>> 
>> Still, in order to be sure we are talking about the exact same VM, version 
>> info is needed.
>> 
>>>> On Oct 18, 2016, at 09:27, Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 18 Oct 2016, at 14:29, Henrik Johansen <henrik.s.johan...@veloxit.no> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 17 Oct 2016, at 8:43 , Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Does a (faster) Cog VM for the Raspberry Pi actually exist ?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I tried comparing the latest OpenSmalltalk VM with some older ones, only 
>>>>>> to find that they are all equally fast (slow actually):
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> pi@raspberrypi ~/Pharo $ ./pharo -nodisplay Pharo.image printVersion
>>>>>> [version] 5.0 #50581
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "http://files.pharo.org/vm/pharoS/raspbian/latest.zip";
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> pi@raspberrypi ~/Pharo $ ./pharo -nodisplay Pharo.image eval '1 
>>>>>> tinyBenchmarks'
>>>>>> '167429692 bytecodes/sec; 11160247 sends/sec'
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "http://www.mirandabanda.org/files/Cog/VM/VM.r3427/cogspurlinuxhtARM-15.33.3427.tgz";
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> pi@raspberrypi ~/Pharo $ ./products/phcogspurlinuxhtRPi/pharo -nodisplay 
>>>>>> Pharo.image eval '1 tinyBenchmarks'
>>>>>> '166992824 bytecodes/sec; 11337746 sends/sec'
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "https://bintray.com/opensmalltalk/vm/download_file?file_path=cog_linux32ARMv6_pharo.cog.spur_201610142319.tar.gz";
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> pi@raspberrypi ~/Pharo $ ./products/phcogspurlinuxhtRPi/pharo -nodisplay 
>>>>>> Pharo.image eval '1 tinyBenchmarks'
>>>>>> '166992824 bytecodes/sec; 11337746 sends/sec'
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> That is no significant difference on a RPi 3, at all. Is this normal ? 
>>>>>> Am I missing something ?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thx,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Sven
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> PS: Just for reference, my Mac Book Pro is 10 times faster
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 1 tinyBenchmarks  "'1323852617 bytecodes/sec; 174185794 sends/sec'"
>>>>> 
>>>>> Are you 100% sure you benched different VM's?
>>>>> A stack VM (PharoS) getting the same results as a Spur VM 
>>>>> (cog_linux32ARMv6_pharo.cog.spur_201610142319.tar.gz) is rather 
>>>>> suspicious...
>>>>> 
>>>>> At least on my Pi3, the spur Cog VM gives  numbers around 250M 
>>>>> bytecodes/160M sends....
>>>>> which, while still "slow", is a decent bump in speed compared to what 
>>>>> you're seeing.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Henry
>>>> 
>>>> Hi Henry,
>>>> 
>>>> That is exactly the kind of reference/experience I am looking for.
>>>> Could you please point me to the exact download URL you downloaded ?
>>>> I will happily test it ;-)
>>>> 
>>>> Thx,
>>>> 
>>>> Sven
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 


Reply via email to