In dreamland only.
that's what i think now. project maybe done, maybe produced but...
Here are a few meaningless numbers:
- a 1.8GHz amd64 processor is about 6 times faster than a 900MHz
Loongson 2F doing md5 crypto.
- the same processor is only 3 times faster doing Blowfish crypto.
thank
AFAIK the JIT is Qemu's; the extra instructions just help the translation from x86 -
tiny code generator bytecode (similar to LLVM) - Loongson. I doubt there's much
magic to it other than minimizing host CPU instructions but... I'm talking out of my ass.
On the other hand you're right to
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:50:41AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
well my question wasn't about running x86 code under emulation on
loongson, but running mips compiled programs on it relatively to x86
compiled programs on x86.
The answer is it depends.
It takes a long time to build certain
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:49:03AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
Would be nice if finally some non-x86 hardware would actually be
available.
It has been available for ages, and well-supported by free software as
well; and I am not only speaking about loongson-based systems.
i mean at
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 08:41:33PM +, Miod Vallat wrote:
2G: fixed 2F without the branch prediction bug. I am told the recent
Yeeloong and Fuloong are fit with 2G processors. I am not even sure
these can be told apart in software, as 2G supposedly reports itself as
a 2F level.
Does
2G: fixed 2F without the branch prediction bug. I am told the recent
Yeeloong and Fuloong are fit with 2G processors. I am not even sure
these can be told apart in software, as 2G supposedly reports itself as
a 2F level.
Does anybody have a piece of assembly code that triggers the
Wow! Thanks a lot for the detailed explanation!
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:00:12AM +, John Long wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:10:33PM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:50:28AM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 09:09:54AM +, John Long wrote:
I see now that you are using a
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:00:12AM +, John Long wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:10:33PM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:50:28AM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 09:09:54AM +, John Long wrote:
I see now that you are using a
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 05:00:06PM +0200, Peter Laufenberg wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:00:12AM +, John Long wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:10:33PM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:50:28AM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 05:00:06PM +0200, Peter Laufenberg wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:00:12AM +, John Long wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:10:33PM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:50:28AM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at
This is still based on the fairly old Loongson 2F; the gen-3 CPUs being
available only in laptops, right? Not the easiest naming scheme to follow...
-- p
Argg, was using the wrong names.
Notebook is called Yeeloong, mini-PC Fuloong. Processor Loongson.
-Otto
where are Loongson 3
Note that all this is because of PMON bugs, we did our best to
circumvent the bugs, but this is the best we can do.
No, we can do better. The real pie-in-the-sky fix is to do what had been
done on hp300 30 years ago: make the bootloader actually be a kernel
without userland, scheduling and
This is still based on the fairly old Loongson 2F; the gen-3 CPUs being
available only in laptops, right? Not the easiest naming scheme to
follow...
Nope, you are confusing things.
1, 1A, 1B: 32-bit only processors. Move along.
2, 2A, 2B, 2C: 64-bit but extra instructions conflict with
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Miod Vallat m...@online.fr wrote:
This is still based on the fairly old Loongson 2F; the gen-3 CPUs being
available only in laptops, right? Not the easiest naming scheme to
follow...
Nope, you are confusing things.
1, 1A, 1B: 32-bit only processors. Move
where are Loongson 3 based computers available?
In dreamland only.
how can loongson 3 be (roughly) compared to x86 CPUs in performance?
It's slower. A hell lot slower.
3A systems are running at around 1GHz. The x86 code translation stuff
was benchmark-only and, to the best of my knowledge,
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 05:00:06PM +0200, Peter Laufenberg wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:00:12AM +, John Long wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:10:33PM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:50:28AM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at
Thanks for the great work and the informative posts. I'm saving the info for
future reference. Especially the history on the Loongson line is great to
know.
how can loongson 3 be (roughly) compared to x86 CPUs in performance?
It's slower. A hell lot slower.
3A systems are running at around 1GHz. The x86 code translation stuff
was benchmark-only and, to the best of my knowledge, has never been made
public (with full source code and acceptable
I haven't been able to figure out how to setup an entry in pmon's boot.cfg
to boot OpenBSD in single user mode. I know on other platforms boot -s from
the OpenBSD boot prompt works correctly.
I've tried all sorts of stuff with the args parameter, no joy. Can anyone
clue me in? Thank you.
--
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 09:09:54AM +, John Long wrote:
I haven't been able to figure out how to setup an entry in pmon's boot.cfg
to boot OpenBSD in single user mode. I know on other platforms boot -s from
the OpenBSD boot prompt works correctly.
I've tried all sorts of stuff with the
Thanks, Otto. I have no complaints. I really appreciate the work everybody
did on this. Just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something obvious.
I figured it would be nice to have a menu selection for booting single user
from pmon. Up to this point I haven't needed it, it was just a nice to
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:50:28AM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 09:09:54AM +, John Long wrote:
I haven't been able to figure out how to setup an entry in pmon's boot.cfg
to boot OpenBSD in single user mode. I know on other platforms boot -s from
the OpenBSD
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:10:33PM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:50:28AM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 09:09:54AM +, John Long wrote:
I see now that you are using a Fuloong and not a Loongson.
I am using a Fuloong (Mini-PC) which is
24 matches
Mail list logo
