Hi Kevin,
> I'm very pleased to hear that you got it running on a Vr41xx,
> but I'm curious about the JIT behavior you saw. I can believe
> that it could run "hello world", but does it really pass all the
> internal regression tests ("make check")? Are you running
> a "normal" MIPS/Linux distribution which assumes a
> hardware FPU and does kernel emulation where necessary,
> or are you using a purely soft-float environment? I ask
> this because most of the problems I have with the JIT are
> in areas where mixed integer/floating arguments are being
> passed, and those might not be an issue with soft-float.
>
I have cross-compiled Kaffe, so it did not pass "make check".
I tried it under a Linux-VR kernel(kernel-2.4.0-test9) which is
enabled with a kernel FPU emulation.
I have not tried under a Linux/MIPS kernel.
> As for the performance you observed, how much memory
> did you have on the board, and what kind of secondary storage
> (disk?) hardware was used? 66MHz isn't fast, but the combined
> compile-and-run time for Caffeinemark for the patched
> kaffe 1.0.7 on a MIPS 5Kc core at 160MHz was in fact
> pretty good, better than 3 Embedded Caffeienmarks
> per megahertz, which isn't as fast as commercial dynmic
> compilers, but which is still several times faster than most
> commercial interpretive JVMs. Running fully interpretive,
> kaffe's performance is mediocre but reasonable, I certainly
> wasn't seeing delays of 10 seconds to run "hello world",
> which is roughly what one would expect scaling your reported
> run time by the frequency. I really think that you are far more
> likely to have been I/O bound, either from paging or from file I/O.
>
TANBAC TB0193 has 16MB SDRAM, and it is using Compact Flash
as a secondary storage.
I try to make jar files compact (strips unused packages)
for a faster initialization.
Thanks,
TAKANO Ryousei
