From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CfuSk-0003Pk-B5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 01:22:38 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CfuSg-0003NO-Fn for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 01:22:35 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CfuSf-0003NI-M3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 01:22:33 -0500 Received: from [212.16.62.51] (helo=mail.13thfloor.at) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CftbZ-0001wb-SQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 00:27:42 -0500 Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 06:27:41 +0100 From: Herbert Poetzl Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] SMB for DOS ? Message-ID: <20041219052740.GA24211@mail.13thfloor.at> References: <41C20E6A.7010507@bellard.org> <03BFD3A6-4FBC-11D9-8729-00039307264A@stanfordalumni.org> <20041218181323.GB8020@mail.13thfloor.at> <200412181832.24252.paul@codesourcery.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200412181832.24252.paul@codesourcery.com> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paul Brook Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 06:32:24PM +0000, Paul Brook wrote: > > > I hope you will not forget us poor mac users. Optimizing x86 on ppc > > > performance would make a number of people very happy, I'd say. > > > > performance on ppc can become very good because > > there are much more registers available for emulating > > the x86 stuff ... > > The really slow bit tends to be MMU emulation, and more > host registers doesn't help here. Mapping all guest registers > directly onto host registers probably doesn't make all that > much difference as the values will tend to be in L1 > cache anyway. well, thought I do some benchmarks with bintrans[1] vs qemu (i386 userspace on PPC) to see what should be possible ... the test cadidates[2] are cli only and do cpu-bound stuff (fibonacci numbers, the game go, and the magic square) version [A] [B] [C] --------------------------------------------------------------- qemu 0.5.5 33.20 583.30 1237.48 qemu 0.6.1 18.33 476.78 872.69 bintrans 0.1 10.33 176.71 348.64 --------------------------------------------------------------- speedup 77.4% 169.8% 150.3% [A] i386-root/bin/fib time i386-user/qemu-i386 i386-root/bin/fib time bintrans-0.1/bintrans i386-root/bin/fib 39088169 Command exited with non-zero status 9 [B] i386-root/bin/go time i386-user/qemu-i386 i386-root/bin/go 50 21 5stone21.in time bintrans-0.1/bintrans i386-root/bin/go 50 21 5stone21.in ... 370 W pass 371 B pass Game over exit (0) [C] i386-root/bin/imc time i386-user/qemu-i386 i386-root/bin/imc 10000 >/dev/null time bintrans-0.1/bintrans i386-root/bin/imc 10000 >/dev/null best, Herbert [1] http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/schani/bintrans/ [2] http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/schani/bintrans/i386-root.tar.gz > Paul