From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33)
	id 1BsTVY-0007Cq-5c
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Aug 2004 17:41:12 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33)
	id 1BsTVW-0007CX-Lz
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Aug 2004 17:41:11 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BsTVW-0007CU-J5
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Aug 2004 17:41:10 -0400
Received: from [64.233.170.192] (helo=mproxy.gmail.com)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BsTRs-0000gz-UW
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Aug 2004 17:37:25 -0400
Received: by mproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 74so430219rnk
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 04 Aug 2004 14:37:24 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <2ad73a040804143720a8afcf@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 18:37:24 -0300
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9_Braga?= <meianoite@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Performances on Mac OS X
In-Reply-To: <4111542D.6050201@bellard.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <000001c47a53$fc072f20$8cdb71d5@msgrus.se>	<41114D7E.7090201@bellard.org>
	<2ad73a040804141359052b1a@mail.gmail.com>
	<4111542D.6050201@bellard.org>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

What if QEMU uses smarter FP code (for a given architecture) when
emulating the CPU itself? Like always using SSE2, since they have
their own registers, instead of going to the stack of the 387 unit?
Ain't that smarter?

About VESA: one can never have too many compiler optimizations :D
Faster is always good in emulation, and if you can have gains by just
switching compilers, why not use this?

I promise I'll look into the VESA code some time. I'm in love with
QEMU, you know ;D

On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 23:25:01 +0200, Fabrice Bellard <fabrice@bellard.org> wrote:
> FP is not used in QEMU except for the CPU emulation itself, so expect no
> gain. About VESA with the Cirrus VGA card, the code just needs to be
> optimized !
> 
> Fabrice.
> 


-- 
"Logic: merely enables one to be wrong with authority"
Doctor Who