Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!

Sections

Who's Online
26 user(s) are online (17 user(s) are browsing Forums)

Members: 1
Guests: 25

mufa, more...

Support us!

Headlines

Forum Index


Board index » All Posts (NinjaCyborg)




Re: PTDQ - faster C2P
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


it doesn't work at hires 256 colours on AGA?

Go to top


Re: PTDQ - faster C2P
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


hypothetically could this be used in an operating system app, especially, a web browser that has an off screen buffer where the html/css has been rendered into a chunky bitmap, and then the actual browser needs to blit sections of that into the real screen buffer to show the rendering in a window

Go to top


Re: Request for testing Sam460LE
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


sure what do we need to do?

Go to top


Re: Trying to get some feedback.
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


if anyone makes a pcie fpga card they should make sure it's OS4 compatible too... in which case just put the ARM CPU on there as well, or use a pi compute.

Go to top


Re: Trying to get some feedback.
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


If you gonna do this, please emulate custom chips also.

Go to top


Re: AK-ILBM 54.15 has issues with some ILBM files
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


i use WarpDT anyway

Go to top


Re: Amiga IDEs
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


You'll find ChatGPt is surprisingly good at writing AmigaOS software, maybe ask it to generate some tutorials for you.

Go to top


Re: How to made from shell commands some directory to be a default one while being in the other one ?
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


@nbache I don't think it uses assigns does it? I thought it used env vars

Go to top


Re: How to made from shell commands some directory to be a default one while being in the other one ?
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


pushcd and popcd are in the finkel shell tools as well IIRC

Go to top


Re: How to made from shell commands some directory to be a default one while being in the other one ?
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


empty string "" can be used in the shell anywhere a path can be used, but refers only to the CD. / on it's own will get you the parent dir, // the parent of the parent and etc. Not sure about installer scripts.

So if you are in Devs/DOSDrivers and you want to be Prefs you can do //Prefs for example, and the implicit CD will take you there.

Go to top


Re: rVNCd v1.38 is released
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


No endianness issues?

Go to top


Re: AmiUpdate Update 2.55 (11.10.2024)
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Some of these bugs I reported in 2019 and the guy refused to even acknowledge them at the time

Go to top


Re: Qt 6 progress
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


so can someone summarise the current status of the latest revision?

Go to top


Re: CLIB4 Shared Objects and Shared Library
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


what is the difference between clib2 and clib4?

Go to top


Re: Why not use the second core for chipset emulation?
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


thank you @hans you have the patience of a saint

Go to top


Re: Why not use the second core for chipset emulation?
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


@smarkusg has anyone done the work do you know, to let the pi emulate the 68k and the mister to emulate the custom hardware? I do appreciate, despite the many comments pointing out the obvious, and despite my question obviously being a 'what if', that there is dearth of money and willing and able developers to make such a thing a reality.

Go to top


Re: Why not use the second core for chipset emulation?
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Reading the comments I can see people are still assuming an SMP approach to use the second core. My point is that, you don't.

Go to top


Re: Why not use the second core for chipset emulation?
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


The cache is only necessary if you are doing SMP. If you use other cores as dedicated co processors it's not relevant. You should know that, since you know everything else.

Go to top


Why not use the second core for chipset emulation?
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


It feels to me that sometimes Amiga community thinking is limited by assumptions that were true in 1995 but may not be true now.

Case in point - in 1995 it was assumed that no next gen Amiga could be backwards compatible because of the dependency on custom chips, their designs, their availability (or lack of), their cost.

And it was assumed that a next gen OS would require features being seen in other operating systems, such as SMP, where any thread can run on any core without race conditions and so on causing problems.

But here in 2024 these assumptions are no longer correct. Even in 2010 they were no longer correct. Arguably even in 1999 they were no longer correct.

For the former, we now have both software (UAE) and hardware (FPGA) emulation options for the custom chips.

For the latter, well, just look at the PS3. That made use of the different cores a deliberate choice - one for the host OS, one for audio handling, others for gameplay and graphics to be used by the game developers as they saw fit. It wasn't like on Windows with 'any thread on any core'.

By the way what is an extra core? It's an additional CPU that has direct memory access same as the first CPU does, effectively. Is that really much different from the original Amiga architecture which had several different chips all accessing memory directly to do processing, it's just that they weren't all general purpose CPUs, they had specific jobs.

Which brings me to the idea I posed in the title. On the PowerPC machines that have an extra core that isn't used, could it be feasible to use that core to run a chipset emulator? If it's never preempted, it should be easier to keep timing, albeit it has to emulate several different chips, but none of them run at clock speeds close to the core's real clock speed.

How would it work? It would need some dedicated memory virtualized to match the chipset memory addresses. This memory would then be mapped to say, a surface on the graphics card that could be attached to a screen or window. Likewise the audio could be mixed with the wider system audio. It would still need applications to be earmarked as 'run this in a sandbox that uses the chip emulator'.

Anyway the point of my post is, rather than work on SMB support for OS4, when there are few chips with multiple cores, and the architecture itself is a dead end, why not use the second core just as a co-processor, same as the original WarpOS which just sent critical sections of code to the PowerPC as if it was some kind of super fast FPU.

Go to top


Re: WebKit based browser initiative
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


If the architecture separates the web browsing engine, from the Amiga GUI, which is exactly how Wayfarer does it (and Iris), then there's no reason in the future that you couldn't have a different browsers lke ibrowse and netsurf all sharing the webkit engine where it's available.

you could even let the user choose, using the ibrowse engine on aminet say, and webkit on a modern website. This would minimise the memory usage by avoiding using the webkit engine on simpler websites that work with a simpler engine.

Firefox used to have a plugin to do this on windows, letting you use the IE engine for websites that had compatibility issues.

This is a very 'Amiga' way to architect it i.e. a pluggable framework.

However there would be considerable work in defining such an interface.

Go to top



TopTop
(1) 2 3 4 ... 17 »




Powered by XOOPS 2.0 © 2001-2024 The XOOPS Project