Native 68k Netsurf

[unusedunused]

SDL is not too slow, its the reason that today no programmer code for a 50 MHZ CPU.

you can use the netsurf or other game ports for linux on a X86 with 50 MHZ.

You see all crawl.the programs are too complex, and they use more bustransfer speed as a slow mediator can offer.thats all.

If you put a 68060 CPU and have a fast GFX Card interface, you can see SDL fly.

too bad that the natami is still not here and show this.
and if you use a native GUI or not doesnt matter for netsurf speed.

problem of netsurf is too, that it can only support 1 pixelformat per bit depth.

I have done the convert routines to use rgb32, or rgb16, but this work not good on voodoo boards and some other cards, but SDL offer to support all cards and can swap data, and with a fast bustransfer speed this cost not so much noticable time in scrolling speed.

so there need another netsurf build do, that support bgr32 and rgb16 PC.

then need release 2 versions, and i am too lazy to add the pixelformant converter for another pixelformat again.

but if somebody add the code in netsurf framebuffer to support rgb16PC, then scroll can work faster on Voodoo 3 cards.

but on page create time it speed up nothing. css is too complex and need so much FPU calcs that a 50 MHZ CPU give no better results.

[unusedunused]

hubbub problem found, if not yet completely solved. its too old libxml2. replaced headers with those of os4 aminet distro and now it compiles ok. waiting for arturs static lib, which should solve linking stage when we come to that. now the amiga dir must get our attention.

Artur can send you complete archive, only you need do is make and all compile.I have no actual version

but its important that you not use GCC 3.4.0.use GCC4, because GCC 3 give you only buggy code, when you enable optimizer.

[unusedunused]

>No, but how you draw to the GUI does matter. If you're using SDL >it's going to be slow. If you use graphics.library or cgx it's going to >be faster.

Have you compile on OS4 a netsurf sdl version and compare speed ?

wawa own OS4, so its possible to compare render speed between OS4 and OS3 SDL version.

it was that native OS4 version was slower as OS3 SDL.
also OS4 Version is report from some user as unstable.pages crashes whole OS4, on netsurf 68k they crash not whole system.

I know you spend lots time in netsurf OS4, change version to work with newer cores, so i think to get a stable version for OS3 is too lots work.

Artur have some gadgets change so they work with agar GUI and SDL.
I still dont understand wy netsurf team does not support a small netsurf version that can run on handy etc.

netsurf is a small browser but need on the portable version with gtk a big and fat GUI system.
So wy not a smaller GUI system use....

and btw

wawa have compile a xwindows program that run on the xlib wrapper.so i think better is when try to compile gtk for xlib wrapper and use then xlib version.this allow lots more programs run on aos 68k.

[unusedunused]

>No. I did try compiling it once out of curiousity but it didn't >work. It wasn't worth more than five minutes of my time fixing it >since I have a native version anyway.

you can see the speed and can see if Cairo is a speedbrake or not.

but if you have a PC, you can  compare the speed with netsurf SDL 68k too.

I have no OS4, wawa seem not want it install again, so we cant do more speedcompare

We have done a speedtest that do stress the gfx part of netsurf most.
I measure the time a big html page need to show.there need lots AA text render, but no CSS layout is use.

I use the 74 kb history.html file of ibrowse for text.

It contain 831 lines simular as this

Fixed WACL PAGEURL not working for blocking embeds

Renamed WACL DELAY and HIDE options to DELAYIMAGES and HIDEIMAGES, whilst adding new DELAYEMBEDS and HIDEEMBEDS options to allow blocking of flash anims, etc

F


this file is show in 2 sec on a classic amiga with AA text.so this show, speed is optimal with such a big text file.And print of AA text is the most complex graphic action a browser do.

but a simple Forum page with only few text and some few graphic, need more than 15 sec on classic, even if that it is not load from internet.

that show, that you cant get more speed, by use of native GUI.

>I don't know why you are so against NetSurf on OS3 with a native >GUI.

I am not against a netsurf OS3 with native GUI, i only tell, i dont want spend time on it to find problems or write pixelconverter , because it bring no advantages of speed, usability.only scrollspeed on some GFX Cards can get faster with a non SDL version.but i can in SDL Version too add another pixelformat converter.I think thats much less work, as native GUI.and with new pixelformat converter, then no speedup of GUI and native is possible, because the Limit is the GFX Bus.

netsurf team have in roadmap to speedup netsurf, but nothing happen since now, frame support, java is miss, so i think when spend much time in Port a browser, better put in Port of OWB.

but if netsurf is easy possible to port and mainten as the SDL version, wy not release newer SDL Versions.

And if somebody want do a OS3 version with native GUI, he can of course do it, and if its here, offer at least same features and at least same speed as SDL versions, i use this

[unusedunused]

>I would strongly argue that a native GUI does bring advantages. >For a start, the OS4 version has full drag'n'drop, tabs, multiple >windows, history, cookies and hotlist windows, ARexx port... Plus it >looks and feels like a native browser, which means a lot to some >people.

yes of course it bring some advantages, but the most problems, many pages can not show with netsurf correct and faster speed all amiga users want, is not possible (only for scrolling for non rgb16 PC Cards)

And this is what i tell, because i have do some tests and profiler builds to see if SDL have a slowdown.

here is a thread i do about this using gprof.i do more tests with render compleyx sites etc.the log i post was only a netsurf start

If you have a linux, you can build a SDL netsurf and use a profiler build,(dont forget to compile a SDL for profiler support).then you can compare with the GTK Version.

http://utilitybase.com/forum/index.php?action=vthread&forum=21&topic=1877

and because i have test this, its a lie, when i write, that a native Version is faster.

>Things are progressing, probably more slowly than than any of the >devs would like, but it is completely unfair to say nothing is >happening.  There are only a few core developers and you can >hardly expect them to spend all their free time on NetSurf.

I mean nothing is happen, on speedup since 1 year.netsurf devs have no time for gsoc.but when look large progress is done during netsurf was in gsoc.

Now 1 year is past, i know lots changes are in netsurf add, because libnsfb and other sdl files must be change, to compile with newest core.

currently libnsfb still not work with current core, so i need again modify 16 bit libnsfb to bring in the big endian pixelformat AOS need.

but when look, what inet sites can netsurf show more with newer versions, i mostly find none.


>I would bet that 68k native netsurf would be at least 30%-50% >faster, that would make it totally useable.

I have get the profiler working for ixemul 68k.On non other AOS system a profiler can work.

I explain  what a profiler is for non developer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profiling_%28computer_programming%29

And i see in the output that all SDL calls are not listet, so teh consuming is below 10%

all higher time usage is netsurf non graphic core.

even if a wonder happen and speedup really is 30-50 % its too few to be usable

remember this inet site need on classic 37 sec.so 50% speedup is a time of 25 sec.

I really notice no diffrence if the inet page need show 25 sec or 37 sec.all is too long in compare to other AOS browsers.

on other side use a X86 and winuae, page show is around 4 sec.

[unusedunused]

For me the biggest arguement for a non SDL version is so it's not restricted to graphics card users.

this of course does with native version work more slow.netsurf have no planar graphic, all is render in 24 bit and need then convert with complex code to 8 bit planar

If you can test how slow AGA is on a 640*256 screen in 8 bit, you can see how slow all go with scrolling.

8 bit look very ugly, because web designer never test a page how it look on 8 bit, because all Systems today in use support more than 8 bit.

I dont believe that anybody use netsurf in daily use on amiga without GFX card.

I think you have a PC or mac right, and show a webpage cost you 4-8 sec of time.

And i dont think that you use then your amiga AGA daily (what CPu you have btw ?)which need to show a page around 50 sec or more(with a 68060 50 MHZ CPU), and give a programmer money for this.

I know there are some users that have a naked A1200, which they use very rare and want see that this old system can run new software same fast as a modern PC and only then they maybe want pay some donate

but this is impossible, and if try to do that, is only waste time.
on amiga there are so few developers and i think this time should spend do more usefull projects.

and if somebody develop for free, he do that mostly because he want use it himself, or hope that other help him and share work.

[unusedunused]

>I guess the 'fun' would be seeing just how fast/usable it could be >on AGA 68k and there's obviously room for improvement.

Yes, but only for fun for others code hundreds of hours doesnt make fun any programmer.

and when you see who is here that do speedoptimize, i see only Peterh and cosmos, but they do speed optimize on near unmeasurable parts.so who should do speed optimize then.

look on OS4 and partly AROS/MOS they have not many programmers fun to code on this systems, because there was much bounties and donations, for things that in windows and linux world everbody can get for free.

so if you want something not very usefull for the programmer you have 2 solutions, learn programing yourself, or do a bounty and hope that somebody do that.

I have no time to help on AGA or native netsurf if i not see a real advantage.

money i not need, i better do things that have more usability, but maybe somebody else is with money more motivate to do that.

[unusedunused]

>But there are people who are currently browsing with AWeb and >iBrowse on their Amiga's without graphics cards...

Can you tell how much memory this classic systems without GFX Cards have ?

netsurf nead at least a amiga with 48 megabyte of RAM to run usefull.
Now tell me which AGA only user have in his amiga 48 megabyte of RAM
the netsurf engine render all pages complete in 32 bit.This all browser do, but other browsers need lots more RAM.

If you use MUI or Reaction you need more RAM usage, because many unused libs are load

>1. Get rid of true type fonts

if this bring a speedup on your system, you can easy check, with first netsurf version.
there are two versions released, 1 with truetype fonts, 1 with internal and fast font that need no AA.
But in real world nobody see a speedup of internal fonts, so there is no time spend to support this.thats too an argument that graphic is no problem, and netsurf Core need most time.

normaly AA truetype fonts are 10* slower as non AA Fonts.

The mistake most amiga users do that do not program, is they live in theory.
Only when you look on praxis and measure speed use a profiler you can see if speedup is really possible.

and this i have done and i see that Problem is the netsurf core which use 95% of time.
and when you with a wonder speedup graphic part that is do from SDL by factor 8 you get only a overall speedup if 4.5 %.

but if you slowdown with AGA by factor 8(yes it cost lots time to convert from chunky to playnar) you get 8*5% 40% slowdown.

[unusedunused]

>Big part of SDL Netsurf slowdown is because it locks itself when downloading pages.

then there should give the donwload task a higher task pri.please tell that Artur

other do not help because when download and render a page, always time is share between render and download.and when render a page, and it take on a classic always 40 sec or more then of course download rate decrease, if system is too slow.

but when Artur change task pri of download task, then download is always fast.this must every other AOS browser do in same way, and have nothing to do with SDL or nor

[unusedunused]

>I reckon it would run fine in 16MB (and the NetSurf website >agrees), you'd just lose some images on image-heavy pages.

this was some years ago, maybe with small pages test.
please surf a little and measure how many memory is used.

I know OS4 is so bad design that it not show exact how many memory is free or memory a program use.This all other AOS /Linux /windows can do even with slab allocator

But maybe you can test netsurfg on Linux and look how much memory increase when you use modern pages.

I do some tests.start netsurf and open default page need 12 megabyte.so here is 16 megabyte true.

Now i click on BBC Page it need 24 megabyte.
then i load amiga.org same memory
click on reuters and last pages i show, memory usage is 34 megabyte.

start netsurf and do http://www.amiga.org org need 18 megabyte

I ask in ML if netsurf have a low mem situation handler, i get no response, so i think, it have non so i am sure amiga with lower as 48 megabyte of RAM you run in crash sooner or later.

best is if your amiga have 64 megabyte or 128 megabyte.
a 32 megabyte system is too small.

but still netsurf use very few RAM in compare to OWB
But i think there is no AGA system with so much RAM out

>I can't speak for MUI, but with Reaction you only load the libs you need. My "gadgets" dir is only >1MB anyway, and that contains things like texteditor.gadget which NetSurf won't be using.

when i start screenmode requester of AOS 3.9 it need 1.4 megabyte.
when i press flush i get 500 kb back.so this few GUI stuff need 500 kb and when i close the screenmode requester, the values get back by remove reaction classes
sdl is only 378 kb in size with debug symbols.i think when remove debug symbols it need only 250 kb

and on low memory every 100 kb count...

[unusedunused]

>NetSurf + Google seems to use about 25MB,

I test with google too, need too 12 megabyte, but a few hundred kb less than netsurf page.

but so better, surf some pages or use netsurf 20 minutes in your normal surfing action.now look how much memory it need.

>Er, what? OS4 is perfectly capable of saying how much memory is >available. Take your OS4 trolling elsewhere, this isn't the thread for it.

I do no trolling.You can read yourself what rigo written about OS4 mem handling here.the value of free memory is wrong.t


"""""
http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flat&order=0&topic_id=29561&forum=33&post_id=508514&refresh=Go#508477

In light of this, I shall reitterate what has been said many times before, free memory figures on OS4.1 are meaningless, so don't believe what you read in the WB titlebar.

Simon
""""

or this from ChrisH

"""""
http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flat&order=0&topic_id=29561&forum=33&post_id=508514&refresh=Go#508481

....

Rant: If OS4.1 had a proper reporting of free memory (it should not be rocket science!) then we would not even be having this argument. This is one area where MorphOS definitely has the advantage, even if it's TLSF allocator isn't quite as advanced as OS4's Slab allocator.
"""""

And here is a thread with benches, that show that OS4 slab is not advanced btw

http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=29569&forum=14&106

>NetSurf memory cache is set to 10MB

i test some memory cache values, but it doesnt matter, the default on netsurf 68k is
memory_cache_size:2097152    

this is 2 megabyte, or i am wrong ?

[unusedunused]

I'm sure there are many A1200 wedges out there with trapdoor Blizzards containing up to 256MB RAM.

maybe, but this are mostly Versions with GFX Card.But there have still nobody say, i have a AGA Amiga with at least 48 megabyte of RAM.or lets say 32 megaybte.

>Yes, the default memory cache is 2MB.

i test some values, but memory usage is always the same, maybe the value is not support in SDL build

Or do you notice a diffrence in memory usage when you change the value ?

I can too set it to 20 megabyte, netsurf need not more or less ram as with 2 megabyte setting

>(although I'm pretty sure OS3 does this too, so Rigo might be referring to something else).

chrisH report it as a OS4 problem and other later too, so its not in AOS 3.please read this thread more

If OS4 show correct memory such a memory loss bug even in a beta release should not possible.

but ok, for you the Hyperions seem great coders, for me not.
I only want say that detect memory loss or something is not good possible.

remember the netsurf cache mem loss Bug i report, nobody notice it, because on Linux there is not so easy memusage show as on WB.

I see this memloss after short usage in AOS 3

[unusedunused]

>@Desiv. No wonder you lost rack of the thread, there's a troll under >the bridge trying to drag it off topic!
>And my 1230XA as had 32mb since the late ninties, i'm sure there >are loads of classics with more ram than that.

this mean a 68030 Card.there need do a non FPU build for this too.

maybe somebody is here with a 68030 card with FPU and a GFX Card and can test netsurf how slow all get when not have a 68060 CPU.

http://www.amiga.org need 37 sec to show on a 68060/50 System
there are 68030 out with 50 MHZ too, but when you use other benchmarks you see that the 68060 is more than 3* faster as a 68030 50 MHZ even if no FPU is use.but whe use worst case

so this mean 37*3 are 111 sec.then you need more seconds for chunky to planar conversion.lets say very optimistic 10% more.

then we are at 122 sec.

does really somebody want wait 2 minutes to see a web page that a slow PC from Year 2000 or other system show in  3 sec ?

there are web pads out, that cost 100 Eur, and they work faster and have better display as a AGA system.

[unusedunused]

if c2p only costs 10% then it would advocate to include support for it it into sdl or netsurf.

it cost sure much more time, but i use optimistic 10% value and i reach 2 minute market to show this page.every 10% slower give at 120 sec 10 sec more

>With attitudes like yours we would not have doom, scumm, mp3 >playback etc on the classic Amiga.

doom scumm mp3 play is usable with afats classic user.

but now tell me which user  play doom on his AGA machine ??
does mp3 play in realtime on the 68030 ?

>Netsurf is only possibility to get modern browser for 68k amigas, it >will require some work. There will be new network stack for our >amigas and it would nice if we could get native Netsurf same time.

yes its nice, i told when i need not program it, i use it too.

But i dont want invest lots time for it, i think i need more than 600 hours for this.and later need more to keep update.

maybe a user that want netsurf on a AGA amiga can answer the questen.

If you can program and you can do a native GUI for netsurf in 600 Hours, do you really want spend this lots of work to see netsurf run on your AGA amiga without Java script and frames ?

reason for me its not worth the big work now, and keep it upto date during netsurf enhance.

so the longer you wait, the less work you have.and to see how netsurf grow and fit your needs and pages SDL version is good, you can not reach faster speed.

but things change maybe when netsurf get usefull speedups, frames and java script.

but before maybe OWB work on AOS.

Here is a mail, what problem it is to make a native GUI.
the atari mint version is develop many months now.

http://vlists.pepperfish.net/pipermail/netsurf-dev-netsurf-browser.org/2011-March/002417.html

[unusedunused]

>That's mostly irrelevant, since we have a frontend that just needs >back-porting. Also the Atari port got results quite quickly, adding >on the extra months used to develop it further is missing the point >somewhat.

thats same, i tell this in ML, the problem for me is not to write a GUI and Code to read or set the values, this i can do in 1 Hour with stormwizard

http://stormwizard.amiforce.de/

I can  write faster a stormwizard GUI than porting your reaction GUI, the problem come when something not work, there need understand how netsurf core work.and to learn how netsurf work cost much time i think, and more because no good docu is here

You or netsurf team do not compile or test 68k Port, so if something is change in main core, then need search wy it not work.

I look now into new libnsfb, now is a function in bitmap scale.
This let show in amiga.org the bars correct.

but with needed scale feature, netsurf get slower i think.and more slower of course on AGA