On Jan 15, 2008, at 6:50 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On Jan 15, 2008, at 6:30 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
Am 15.01.2008 um 17:32 schrieb Alexander Graf:
Jamie Lokier wrote:
Alexander Graf wrote:
I believe the 5% performance hit
that goes with them is no real problem, as most people should be
using
x86_64 nowadays anyway.
*Boggle*! x86_64 is only a few years old, and cheap low-power
x86_64
laptops are relatively recent.
-- Jamie
So you really want to do dynamic retranslation on ancient
hardware? To
me emulated systems already feel slow on really recent machines, I
don't want to go back to something even slower.
If you use kqemu there even is near no performance hit at all,
which I
believe is the main use of qemu on i386 anyway. Furthermore x86_64
is
_way_ faster, as it provides a lot more registers.
I think the benefit you get from cutting the gcc3 dependency is
way more
important than a major performance hit that people will usually
only see
on the next release of qemu, by which time things have shifted
towards
x86_64 even more.
One thing you don't seem to understand is that QEMU releases don't
upgrade our hardware, especially not from Apple. An x86_64 Mac Pro
is more than double the price for my PowerMac G5 back then. Don't
think about what people "should" be using in your opinion, look at
what they are actually using.
What I am actually talking about is that the only real gcc4 breakage
I am aware of is on i386. I just built x86_64-softmmu on a POWER6
host with gcc4.1.2 and it "simply worked". Please tell me if there
is anything broken for you on gcc4. I believe there isn't (please
use gcc4.2+).
I'm sorry. Looks like I did not check this properly. It just broke for
me - I will take a look at it tomorrow then.
Regards,
Alex
