Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: News of Free 060 Like Apollo Core License  (Read 29801 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline grond

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2016
  • Posts: 154
    • Show all replies
Re: News of Free 060 Like Apollo Core License
« on: November 08, 2017, 09:56:05 AM »
Quote from: Chucky;832762
For me. incompabilities started from the beginning..  ... And I brought it to the datastorm demoparty..  we checked it out.  and  "ok this is for checking sysinfo and doom" meehh  lets have some beers instead..

and there it is.  since that I haven't tried my Vampire..

So you are basing your opinion on old information. Did it ever occur to you that the core is a work-in-progress and that many of your compatibility problems may have been already solved?  I do understand that a work-in-progress may not be an attractive alternative for many NOW (especially for people who'd invest time and money into developing some new hardware based on this work-in-progress). Yes, so just wait some more but don't dismiss this prematurely and based on past experience.  Let me add another point: it is fine that you and your demoscener pals all have 060 accelerators. Congratulations on forming part of the Amiga elite. However, many people don't have one and there are not enough 060s left to satisfy all the market demand for fast Amiga accelerators. The only option for them is to buy a new 020 or 030 based accelerator (usually without an FPU and MMU), spend a ridiculous amount of money for an aging accelerator card or buy an 080-based accelerator. Anyone can make their choice for themselves. Any new option should be welcomed and even if it is only some ARM core dedicated to running UAE-jit 68k emulation.
 

Offline grond

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2016
  • Posts: 154
    • Show all replies
Re: News of Free 060 Like Apollo Core License
« Reply #1 on: November 08, 2017, 11:45:00 AM »
Quote from: Chucky;832792
well  I still see people having that same issues that I had.  so those incompabilities is not solved yet.
 If they really appear on the newest core release, then you should report those issues. And, if you want to make a good job while you are at it, try whether the same problem appears if you run the suspect code on WinUAE with 040-jit setting. This is because most reported incompatibility are just coding bugs where the software cannot deal with a CPU that is way faster than the programmer expected. The highest-ranking probability of such coding flaws is where coders start a blitjob without checking whether the preceding one has been finished already because they assume that whatever the CPU is doing in parallel will keep the CPU busy long enough for the preceding blitjob do end in time.  
Quote
and I constantly hear that it is "MORE COMPATIBLE" when it doesn't behave like any 68k.  so how can it be more compatible?

for me Compatible = Behaves like THAT product..

So either the Apollo-Team is stupid or lying. Hey, wait, there is a third option: you are applying a definition of the word "compatible" that obviously cannot be the same one as used by the Apollo-Team. Obviously it would be impossible to behave more like something than the very thing itself, right? So if you keep pondering this for a second it should become apparent that it means that it does not behave like an 060 because it does not bork when it sees e.g. a 64bit multiplication. It does better, it just executes the instruction.    
Quote
Amnyway. you are right. 060 cards is getting insanly expensive.. and I am doing whatever I can to solve that.  but the thing is. the vampirecards are soon approaching that very same pricetag...
 How is 300EUR approaching anything? Yes, other versions with more capable hardware might cost more. Do you think this "trend" deducted from two distinct points will continue if alternative 080-based accelerators will hit the market?  
Quote
Anyway my point is still:  IF they want people to use their core. DO listen to more people.
 There is no Vampire that has not been sold. And, frankly put, the input to be expected is none that we couldn't come up with ourselves: make it compatible. Sure, but this takes work and work takes time. It is as simple as that. In the a1k thread Gunnar pointed out that he can do the compatible MMU now but this would mean changing priorities. If somebody believes that more money can be made with an accelerator that has a compatible MMU, this somebody would have to fund the development. Right now the AGA reimplementation seems to be much more important because there are many times as many people wanting a stand-alone Amiga or an AGA upgrade for their OCS/ECS hardware than people that cannot do without the legacy-compatible MMU.  
Quote
I am very often to demoparties etc. I talk to coders etc  and I still have to fine ONE democoder remotly interested in doing something.  as it breaks the bonderys of why they even care about the amiga.

Why would anyone want to cater a market with a new CPU that doesn't want to have any restrictions removed? I understand that some people find it interesting to code for an unexpanded A500. At the upper end of this pretty much the same people find it interesting to code for an A1200 with an 060/50. Well, so be it. Even availability of 75 MHz 060 didn't change the latter. This clearly isn't the market for a new CPU.
 

Offline grond

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2016
  • Posts: 154
    • Show all replies
Re: News of Free 060 Like Apollo Core License
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2017, 12:43:41 PM »
Quote from: Chucky;832807
but this template does NOT work on vampires..

You are doing it again. I take the freedom to correct your statement: your template does not work on your Vampire having an outdated core.
 

Offline grond

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2016
  • Posts: 154
    • Show all replies
Re: News of Free 060 Like Apollo Core License
« Reply #3 on: November 10, 2017, 01:51:08 PM »
@Chucky:  

If you were to implement the integer CPU, an FPU, an MMU, and the chipset, in which order would you tackle those?  

I think it is reasonable to do the integer CPU first because else you cannot execute any code. The FPU should be implemented before the MMU because there is far more code using the FPU than the MMU. So the order Integer, FPU, MMU makes a lot of sense. FPU is in the making so MMU will have to wait. This is where we are now and it makes a lot of sense.  

What about AGA and SAGA? Obviously there is some confusion about what SAGA is. SAGA is an enhanced AGA with an additional chunky playfield. The chunky playfield is controlled via registers in the Amiga register address range and can be controlled by the copper. Since AmigaOS doesn't know about chunky playfields, there is a P96 driver for the chunky playfield which makes this chipset feature appear as standard RTG even though it can/could do much more (e.g. copper scrolling and copper palette shading).

The most notable advantage of SAGA is that the screen DMA can read directly from the local Vampire RAM which is faster than previous fastmem but functionally chipmem. All previous RTG software was slowed down by outdated hardware buses with something like 16 MB/s maximum throughput. The Vampire does hundreds of MB per second.  

So far we have only seen the chunky playfield part of SAGA, i.e. the part that seems to be simple RTG but is implemented in an Amiga-way, in public releases. The Gold3 previews already have the AGA chipset, i.e. the planar part of SAGA added but there are still some bugs. You could call this the AGA in SAGA. Simply put SAGA = AGA + RTG on one and the same screen.  

I think it wouldn't make any sense to make an effort to purposely slow down the planar part of SAGA to AGA speed. It is not even required for (my broader understanding of) compatibility. I can understand that democoders want to work around a known set of limitations and that for this reason the Vampire/Apollo project doesn't make sense for them. Well, so be it, it is not as if the demosceners were such a big part of the Amiga usergroup. Their wishes just don't comply with the goals of the project and this is not going to Change no matter how much "input" and "listening" there might be.  

Now let's return to the CPU: you are very emotional about AMMX, hyperthreading and 64 bit extensions which you consider crap that is not going to get used and that take FPGA real estate that could be used for stuff that does get used like FPU and MMU.  I know that you do not agree to Gunnar's vision but perhaps this explanation will make you see that there is an inner logic to the sequence in which the individual items on the TODO list are tackled.  

Gunnar wants to improve the 68k ISA and extend it to what it might look like if Motorola hadn't dropped the ball over 20 years ago. This is what drives him, this is why it is happening at all.

You want something different. Everybody understood that and the project is not going to change its goals for you and those who think alike no matter how much you voice your opinion and personal preferences. You are free to conclude that Apollo/Vampire does not cater your very well defined needs and that's all there really is.  

Anyway, if one wants to do a modern extension of the 68k architecture, it immediately follows that the 8 address, 8 data and 8 FPU registers just aren't enough. There is a need for 64 bit datatypes handled in the integer part while the need for 16 bit datatypes is almost zero in today's computing. More registers and especially more FPU registers are a must.

Whether you agree with this vision or not, if you want to end up with such a CPU, you can either build a 32bit CPU, throw it away and start with another one that is 64bit OR you build a 64bit CPU right from the start which means to have those additional registers and to make them wider right from the start. Adding a few AMMX instructions that actually work on those wide registers then is far less work than building and testing an FPU.

And AMMX actually does get used not only in RiVA but more importantly in the P96 driver. So even the totally-anti-AMMX user will have some benefit from the presence of AMMX even if it remains completely hidden from the user.  

The same goes for the FPU itself: if you implement a 68k FPU with just 8 registers and everything the way it used to be, then all this work will go to the trashcan if you do an FPU afterwards that can access 24 registers. It is simply easier to first implement the _superset_ and then the _subset_ based on the finished superset.  

The AMMX parts and additional registers are the foundation of a house that will have an FPU and MMU as a roof. You simply can't start with the roof and then build the foundation.  

Another thing you have addressed multiple times is how femu is not better than the 68060.library approach. This is wrong for a simple reason: femu will be included in the core and thus not visible to outside code, most of all it cannot be overwritten by accident. More importantly femu will be present from power-on and does not need to get loaded from disk or wherever. This means that thanks to femu the FPU looks to any code exactly like an 882 FPU right after power-on/reset.  

When you compare the Apollo FPU in its current state to the 040/060 FPU, the Apollo FPU is just as well a software/hardware mix as the 040/060 FPUs are. While the 040/060 FPUs have a fixed distinction between hardware instructions and emulated instructions, the Apollo FPU is flexible and can be handtuned for the FPGA at hand. For a smaller footprint you can implement less instructions in hardware, for a larger FPGA you can implement all instructions in hardware. I think that is actually a very interesting approach.  

It is unfortunate that the FPGA in the V2 is too small for the full-featured Apollo Core. However, please understand that this isn't a concern to Gunnar. The Vampire isn't his baby, it is a card that licenses his core and is now too small to hold all of it. He doesn't develop the core for the Vampire, he develops the core as an end in itself.  

I hope this clears up a few things...
« Last Edit: November 10, 2017, 01:55:05 PM by grond »
 

Offline grond

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2016
  • Posts: 154
    • Show all replies
Re: News of Free 060 Like Apollo Core License
« Reply #4 on: November 10, 2017, 02:23:27 PM »
Quote from: smf;832949
So i have been ripped off twice again and sits on hardware for a fortune that will not be fully functional for me just like the V600? ;(

I knew i should have stayed away from it when i bought the second card but i was even more stupid when i bought the third one.

I don't think you are entitled to get the full-featured Apollo Core for free just because you bought the V2. You got what you paid for and you even got free updates you didn't pay for. The next update will give you an FPU that is faster than any 882 alongside the integer unit that is faster than any 060. I can't see what's the rip-off here.
 

Offline grond

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2016
  • Posts: 154
    • Show all replies
Re: News of Free 060 Like Apollo Core License
« Reply #5 on: November 10, 2017, 04:14:07 PM »
Quote from: kolla;832962

FEMU is by default in the provided Kickstart? Can it be disabled and enabled by the user?

What does this mean for AROS and EmuTOS? Would they require their own emulation implementations?


You didn't read or understand what I wrote above. Femu will become part of the core and be present from power-on/reset. This is one important advantage over 060.library and does not depend on the OS.
 

Offline grond

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2016
  • Posts: 154
    • Show all replies
Re: News of Free 060 Like Apollo Core License
« Reply #6 on: November 11, 2017, 02:00:10 PM »
Quote from: kolla;833003
I asked if there are other pieces of software running behind the scenes, that should be easy to answer.


Yes, there is WinUAE running inside the core! Now you found our secret! And that we are violating the GPL on top of it all!
 

Offline grond

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2016
  • Posts: 154
    • Show all replies
Re: News of Free 060 Like Apollo Core License
« Reply #7 on: November 15, 2017, 10:35:50 AM »
Quote from: psxphill;833157
Going back to the point of this thread, is it the "V2" or "V4" core that is being offered?

There is only one core which is adapted for different hardwares, namely the V2 and the V4. What features can and will be included into a core for a new hardware will depend on that hardware. If it has a relatively small FPGA, the FPU would likely have more microcoded (i.e. transparently software-emulated) instructions than if a larger FPGA was used.