Re: Crusoe's persistent translation on linux?

[Nuno Silva <nuno.silva@vgertech.com>]

Hi!

Samphan Raruenrom wrote:
> Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> 
>>> I'm using 2.4.21 kernel on TM5800 Crusoe in Compaq TC1000 Tablet PC.
>>> Currently the performance is not very good but the more I learn
>>> about its architecture the more I'm obessesed about it (just like
>>> the days when I use 68000 Amiga). Too bad that there are very little
>>> information about the chip so I can't do anything much to improve
>>> the performance myself (like enlarge the translation cache? how?).
>>
>> How much 'not very good' is the performance? I'm considering buying an
>> Sharp Actius MM10 notebook, and so far I wasn't able to find ANY numbers
>> on how fast a 1GHz Crusoe actually is, nevermind with Linux running on
>> it ... and how much running Linux affects the expected battery life.
>> Can you share your experience?
> 
> 
> See http://www.tabletpcbuzz.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4451
> The guy make a real world benchmark and conclude that a 1 GHZ TM5800
> with latest CMS and PTT should be comparable with 1 GHZ PIIIm.
> Normally TM5800 users will say it is comparable to 600-900 MHz PIII.
> 
> About running Linux on it. Application launch time is not good
> (18 sec. to launch GNOME Help, 7 sec. to relaunch). But after that
> it seems like linux GUI apps are more responsive.
> Building software projects seem to take longer than it should be.
> Building OpenOffice.org take more than 4 days while it take
> about 1-2 days on PIII. I guess the CMS has to translate 'gcc'
> on every invokation?  If so, can the kernel help in any way?
> 


This raises a new question. How about a port of Linux to the "VLIW" so 
that we can skip x86 "code morphing" interelly?

I'm sure that 1GHz would benefit from it. Is it possible, Linus?

After googling a bit i went to
http://216.239.57.100/search?q=cache:GCP2Ecz931UJ:www.icsi.berkeley.edu/~fleiner/research.html+crusoe+linux+native+port&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

...But there isn't many more info. Is there any advantage?

Sorry for the OT... :)

Regards,
Nuno Silva



> Battery life and Linux should be Ok. You'll have 'longrun' utility
> to control cpu power consumption vs. performance. I understand
> that the CPU already control its power consumption itself, even
> without the help of the kernel, right?
>