JaS Posted February 13, 2007 Share Posted February 13, 2007 I will ask Semthex if he is intrested in this project. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Posted February 13, 2007 Author Share Posted February 13, 2007 That would be awesome, we could use a kernel guru like Semthex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
munky Posted February 13, 2007 Share Posted February 13, 2007 Integrating the SSE2 and SSE3 emulation right into the kernel would give us the ultimate solution. If we can successfully trap the exceptions raised by those missing instructions (and surely we must be able to - given thats how the SSE3 emulation works) and call into routines borrowed from the qemu code, then SSE-only OSx86 will be a reality. I have no idea how to even begin putting such a thing together, but i'd dearly love to see it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Posted February 13, 2007 Author Share Posted February 13, 2007 That's what I was thinking when I was first brainstorming the idea of OS X on SSE, but I figured it would require too much work for just a few of us to do. Semthex has the skills to patch it all together, I just hope he is interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Embio Posted February 13, 2007 Share Posted February 13, 2007 Semthex being involved would be awesome!! However, one thing I just thought of is that we are going to need to write drivers for all this old hardware that is suddenly opening up to us. Just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Posted February 13, 2007 Author Share Posted February 13, 2007 you can replace anything except for the mobo and processor with supported parts. you've got pci cards, usb devices, sound cards the only thing that may be incompatible is the cpu and there isn't anything you can do about that. (just buy a p3 with a compatible processor or replace with another) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Posted February 15, 2007 Author Share Posted February 15, 2007 has anyone downloaded my "PearOS"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mac-mini Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 if it works with 10.4.8 i will test on my 800mhz p3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacRetail Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 has anyone downloaded my "PearOS"? Well, I downloaded the Slax Modules you posted, because I had already downloaded the Slax KillBill Edition. I"ll try it this weekend, but the problem is my testing machine has SSE2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Posted February 15, 2007 Author Share Posted February 15, 2007 You can't use killbill, because it's too big to fit into ram. My version is only 128mb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cro Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 i'm downloading now, will test on my athlon 1600+ machine with 768mb ram. will test when done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Embio Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 I will start testing on monday night - next available all nighter window Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacRetail Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 You can't use killbill, because it's too big to fit into ram. My version is only 128mb. Why does it have to fit in RAM? Is that faster? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Embio Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 think that one through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Posted February 17, 2007 Author Share Posted February 17, 2007 Reading from the cd causes slax to lag. When you copy it to ram it's reading it directly from memory so it will be almost instantaneous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OoOoOoO Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 take a look Mac OS X/Darwin User space emulato(from qemu) so your kernel will work natively, and all apps runned with qemu-darwin-i386 will be run in on emulated proc(sse2 sse3 emulation i guess) http://qemu.org/qemu-doc.html#SEC61 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Posted February 19, 2007 Author Share Posted February 19, 2007 That is very interesting. I am going to read more about it tomorrow morning. Sleep time here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
munky Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Still sleeping? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@nd®£§§!! Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 what about SSE3 emulation code from bochs ??? doesn´t it works better?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Posted February 22, 2007 Author Share Posted February 22, 2007 Sorry, I have a physics assessment tomorrow that i've been studying for. About the user space emulator... I think that using it would increase the speed slightly, but because SSE2 is still being emulated, it will still be far from native speed. But unless we end up doing the SSE2 emulation, this is a good step towards native speed. About the SSE2 emulator in qemu/bochs... somewhere in that code will be a function that gets the SSE2 instructions and translates them into SSE compatible instructions. I'm sure with a bit of modification, this code could be put into the OS X kernel. But since I don't know how to do that, we have to find someone that is able to do it. We Still don't have a reply from JaS or semthex, so i'm guessing they are either busy with something else, or not interested. Anyways, after next week I am free from exams (for a while) so I will check up on this and reply more often. Dragon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
munky Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 dont be sorry, we all appreciate the effort you're putting into this - i was just keen to hear good news of course your studies should come first. hopefully JaS or Semthex will becom einterested enough.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VirtualBox - interesting at all? Its a QEMU-based 'virtualizer' but has dynamic recompilation. From the wikipedia entry: VirtualBox attempts to run as much guest code natively (i.e. directly on the host processor) as possible. This works well for user-mode code running in the guest's ring 3 of the Intel ring architecture. However, the guest's ring-0 code, which will usually contain lots of privileged instructions, will need to be intercepted. VirtualBox has a rather unique approach to fix this conflict: It tricks the guest operating system to actually execute its ring-0 code in ring 1, which is normally unused on the Intel architecture. If problems arise, VirtualBox has a built-in dynamic recompiler, like other virtualizers do. VirtualBox's recompiler is based on the open-source QEMU. In addition, however, VirtualBox automatically disassembles and, in many situations, patches the guest code to avoid future recompilations, as these are comparably expensive.[2]As a result, both the guest's ring-3 and ring-0 code can run natively most of the time, and with this combination of "traditional" recompiling and actual code patching, VirtualBox achieves a performance that is comparable to that of VMware.[3] Does that sound like it might possibly use QEMU's SSE-emulation code if it hits problems running it natively? EDIT: Its guest OS page says Darwin doesnt work yet. dammit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Posted February 23, 2007 Author Share Posted February 23, 2007 It would be the perfect solution if it worked, but i've already taken a look at VirtualBox and gave up when I saw that it wasn't working with darwin. For the moment it would be good if some people tried running OS X using the slax I posted and maybe posting if it was slow/fast for them. It was running at a decent speed for me, and I have a 450mhz p3. I'm going away on school camp next week, but keep posting so I can read up when I get back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
munky Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 It seems strange Darwin wont work, given that it supports other BSD unixes. Might give it a try sometime... Will grab your slax at some point - gotta dig the P3 out of the garage first Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(MoC) Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 I was reading this project since it started. I can help with testing and other things! Now I'm downloading the image at very slow speeds. I hate Megaupload..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
munky Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 Just FYI, I grabbed VirtualBox and tried it on my hackintosh (Pentium D920, Intel D945 - see sig) and tried to boot the Myzar 10.4.5 disc (only one I had to hand at that moment). After the BIOS screen, two capital E's appear in the corner and then it does nothing else. Anyone any idea what this error code (if thats what it is) signifies in the darwin bootloader? I figured we could perhaps grab the opensource version of VirtualBox and set about fixing the Darwin support. I have a sneaking suspicion that its only listed as not working because there is some problem with the bootloader. If we could get it to work, and if it does indeed emulate SSE2/3 on SSE1 hardware, we'd be set EDIT: I guess the thing to do would be to boot virtualbox on an SSE-only box, boot up an OS that works (ie not darwin/OS X) and try to run something which needs SSE2 and see what happens. If it doesnt emulate the SSE2 instruction, there's no point in continuing with VirtualBox, at least not for our purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts