1 Apr 2012 22:31
18 Apr 2012 18:29
macppc vs evbppc binary packages
Greg Troxel <gdt <at> ir.bbn.com>
2012-04-18 16:29:29 GMT
2012-04-18 16:29:29 GMT
We are trying to build packages on some evbppc systems (under -6/current) and finding them a bit crashy under load. So I am wondering to what extent packages built on a macppc (that's from 2001 or so, dual-core 500 Mhz G3) will run on an evbppc. I would expect all the instructions in the G3 to be present in the new chips (although I understand the memory management architecture is different). But, I wonder if the ABI is somehow different. I'd appreciate advice voting for: yes, it ought to work maybe - worth trying you're doomed, don't bother
18 Apr 2012 18:58
Re: macppc vs evbppc binary packages
Matt Thomas <matt <at> 3am-software.com>
2012-04-18 16:58:32 GMT
2012-04-18 16:58:32 GMT
On Apr 18, 2012, at 9:29 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: > > We are trying to build packages on some evbppc systems (under > -6/current) and finding them a bit crashy under load. So I am wondering > to what extent packages built on a macppc (that's from 2001 or so, > dual-core 500 Mhz G3) will run on an evbppc. I would expect all the > instructions in the G3 to be present in the new chips (although I > understand the memory management architecture is different). But, I > wonder if the ABI is somehow different. I'd appreciate advice voting > for: The problem is your evbppc systems don't emulate the OEA FP instructions. So when it encounters one, it will get a SIGILL. We could put the fpemul code in the kernel but that code isn't that modular and need some help to work on non-IBM4xx.
18 Apr 2012 19:18
Re: macppc vs evbppc binary packages
Havard Eidnes <he <at> NetBSD.org>
2012-04-18 17:18:06 GMT
2012-04-18 17:18:06 GMT
> We are trying to build packages on some evbppc systems (under > -6/current) and finding them a bit crashy under load. Oh, you do? I wonder if I'm seeing the same problem... I upgraded one of my macppc systems to 6.0_BETA in order to build packages for that, and started a single-threaded build. It is now most likely sitting in DDB on the (vga) console back in my office while I'm on the road this week... Previously I've not experienced such crashes with 4.0, 5.0 or 5.1. Regards, - Håvard
18 Apr 2012 19:21
Re: macppc vs evbppc binary packages
Greg Troxel <gdt <at> ir.bbn.com>
2012-04-18 17:21:14 GMT
2012-04-18 17:21:14 GMT
Oh, you do? I wonder if I'm seeing the same problem... I upgraded one of my macppc systems to 6.0_BETA in order to build packages for that, and started a single-threaded build. It is now most likely sitting in DDB on the (vga) console back in my office while I'm on the road this week... Previously I've not experienced such crashes with 4.0, 5.0 or 5.1. That's interesting - there may be one or two problems, having to do with disk io, or perhaps NFS/network traffic, and both a pq3 development system and a p2020 development system are affected.
18 Apr 2012 19:23
Re: macppc vs evbppc binary packages
Greg Troxel <gdt <at> ir.bbn.com>
2012-04-18 17:23:13 GMT
2012-04-18 17:23:13 GMT
Matt Thomas <matt <at> 3am-software.com> writes: > On Apr 18, 2012, at 9:29 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: > >> >> We are trying to build packages on some evbppc systems (under >> -6/current) and finding them a bit crashy under load. So I am wondering >> to what extent packages built on a macppc (that's from 2001 or so, >> dual-core 500 Mhz G3) will run on an evbppc. I would expect all the >> instructions in the G3 to be present in the new chips (although I >> understand the memory management architecture is different). But, I >> wonder if the ABI is somehow different. I'd appreciate advice voting >> for: > > The problem is your evbppc systems don't emulate the OEA FP instructions. > So when it encounters one, it will get a SIGILL. > > We could put the fpemul code in the kernel but that code isn't that > modular and need some help to work on non-IBM4xx. So if I modified the compiler on the macppc to have soft-float as default, it might work?
18 Apr 2012 19:25
Re: macppc vs evbppc binary packages
Havard Eidnes <he <at> NetBSD.org>
2012-04-18 17:25:21 GMT
2012-04-18 17:25:21 GMT
> Oh, you do? I wonder if I'm seeing the same problem... I > upgraded one of my macppc systems to 6.0_BETA in order to build > packages for that, and started a single-threaded build. It is > now most likely sitting in DDB on the (vga) console back in my > office while I'm on the road this week... Previously I've not > experienced such crashes with 4.0, 5.0 or 5.1. > > That's interesting - there may be one or two problems, having to do with > disk io, or perhaps NFS/network traffic, and both a pq3 development > system and a p2020 development system are affected. Disk io could be it, these boxes don't do NFS, at least. I'll try to collect more info this coming Monday when I'm back in the office. Regards, - Håvard
18 Apr 2012 19:29
Re: macppc vs evbppc binary packages
Eduardo Horvath <eeh <at> NetBSD.org>
2012-04-18 17:29:52 GMT
2012-04-18 17:29:52 GMT
On Wed, 18 Apr 2012, Greg Troxel wrote: > We are trying to build packages on some evbppc systems (under > -6/current) and finding them a bit crashy under load. So I am wondering > to what extent packages built on a macppc (that's from 2001 or so, > dual-core 500 Mhz G3) will run on an evbppc. I would expect all the > instructions in the G3 to be present in the new chips (although I > understand the memory management architecture is different). But, I > wonder if the ABI is somehow different. I'd appreciate advice voting > for: > > yes, it ought to work > > maybe - worth trying > > you're doomed, don't bother PowerPC exposes the cache layout to userland to userland for things like memcpy. Originally the cache layout was hardcoded in libc. When working on the IBM 4xx port we added code to libc to read the cache layout information. That was arount 2000-2001. So if you're running an old macppc userland on a chip that has a slightly different cache layout you may have some issues. Then there's also the FPU emulation code that I did for the 4xx port which is needed to run things like newfs and fsck. Eduardo(Continue reading)
18 Apr 2012 19:33
Re: macppc vs evbppc binary packages
Greg Troxel <gdt <at> ir.bbn.com>
2012-04-18 17:33:40 GMT
2012-04-18 17:33:40 GMT
Eduardo Horvath <eeh <at> NetBSD.org> writes: > On Wed, 18 Apr 2012, Greg Troxel wrote: > >> We are trying to build packages on some evbppc systems (under >> -6/current) and finding them a bit crashy under load. So I am wondering >> to what extent packages built on a macppc (that's from 2001 or so, >> dual-core 500 Mhz G3) will run on an evbppc. I would expect all the >> instructions in the G3 to be present in the new chips (although I >> understand the memory management architecture is different). But, I >> wonder if the ABI is somehow different. I'd appreciate advice voting >> for: >> >> yes, it ought to work >> >> maybe - worth trying >> >> you're doomed, don't bother > > PowerPC exposes the cache layout to userland to userland for things like > memcpy. Originally the cache layout was hardcoded in libc. When working > on the IBM 4xx port we added code to libc to read the cache layout > information. That was arount 2000-2001. So if you're running an old > macppc userland on a chip that has a slightly different cache layout you > may have some issues. > > Then there's also the FPU emulation code that I did for the 4xx port which > is needed to run things like newfs and fsck.(Continue reading)
18 Apr 2012 20:00
Re: macppc vs evbppc binary packages
Matt Thomas <matt <at> 3am-software.com>
2012-04-18 18:00:16 GMT
2012-04-18 18:00:16 GMT
On Apr 18, 2012, at 10:33 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: > > Eduardo Horvath <eeh <at> NetBSD.org> writes: > >> On Wed, 18 Apr 2012, Greg Troxel wrote: >> >>> We are trying to build packages on some evbppc systems (under >>> -6/current) and finding them a bit crashy under load. So I am wondering >>> to what extent packages built on a macppc (that's from 2001 or so, >>> dual-core 500 Mhz G3) will run on an evbppc. I would expect all the >>> instructions in the G3 to be present in the new chips (although I >>> understand the memory management architecture is different). But, I >>> wonder if the ABI is somehow different. I'd appreciate advice voting >>> for: >>> >>> yes, it ought to work >>> >>> maybe - worth trying >>> >>> you're doomed, don't bother >> >> PowerPC exposes the cache layout to userland to userland for things like >> memcpy. Originally the cache layout was hardcoded in libc. When working >> on the IBM 4xx port we added code to libc to read the cache layout >> information. That was arount 2000-2001. So if you're running an old >> macppc userland on a chip that has a slightly different cache layout you >> may have some issues. >>(Continue reading)
RSS Feed