[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu vs gcc4

From: Paul Brook
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu vs gcc4
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 01:24:48 +0100
User-agent: KMail/1.9.5

On Wednesday 25 October 2006 00:39, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Monday 23 October 2006 2:37 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
> > It turn out that qemu already does most of the hard work, and a code
> > generation backend is fairly simple. The diff for my current
> > implementation is <2k lines of common code, plus <1k lines for each of
> > x86, amd64 and ppc32 hosts.
> My understanding is that the version you linked to with your new backend
> currently _only_ supports coldfire/m68k?

ColdFire is the only target that uses it exclusively.  Arm is currently a 
hybrid of dyngen and the new backend.  So is i386, to a lesser extent.  Other 
targets have minimal changes necessary to make them work.

> Do you have a quick "here's you how try it out" thing?  (For example, when
> I first show people qemu I boot a knoppix cd image under it.  Fast and
> shiny. :)

One of my goals when writing it was to be able to reuse most of the existing 
qemu code. There should be no user-visible impact. Unless you already 
understand how qemu/dyngen works it's not going to mean a lot to you. The end 
result is very similar, just a slightly different strategy for getting there.

In theory it should allow better performance, but that's still a way off.

https://nowt.dyndns.org/ has patches against cvs (thought they may be slightly 
out of date), and a complete svn repository you can checkout. Build it just 
like normal qemu.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]