Wow! Thanks a lot for the detailed explanation!
> > 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
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 an
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.
> >
>
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 certai
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 qu
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 y
>> 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
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.
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
> 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 1:41 PM, Miod Vallat 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 along.
>
> 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 off
> 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 in
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 b
>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
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
>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 th
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 ar
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) whic
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 Open
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
h
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 t
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.
--
P
24 matches
Mail list logo
