Native 68k Netsurf

[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

[chris]

>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.

I can get the executable down to 5MB, maybe less (given my estimate is based on PPC code, which is bigger than 68k), by removing all optional dependencies and using DataTypes only for the images (this is pending some core changes).  I reckon it would run fine in 16MB (and the NetSurf website agrees), you'd just lose some images on image-heavy pages.

the netsurf engine render all pages complete in 32 bit.

Actually it sends drawing commands to the frontend with 32-bit colour definitions.  If you're drawing direct to the window there's no memory overhead to be concerned with, you just need FindColor(), RectFill() or whatever.

Images are 32-bit uncompressed RGBA, but losing a few images on an image-heavy page isn't much of a problem.  If we're set to only use a DataTypes loader we can cheat anyway, and draw direct to the window in 8-bit ignoring the decompression stage.

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

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.

[nicholas]

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

Surely something like TinyPTC with its fast colour conversion routines would help here?

[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...

[nicholas]

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

[chris]

>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.

NetSurf + Google seems to use about 25MB, however this is with everything optional compiled in, and it's a debug symbols binary.  The version of libjpeg I'm using is 1MB alone - libjpeg, libvpx, libmng, liblcms, libpng, libcairo+dependencies total nearly 6MB, which brings it down to just over the 18MB a 16MB A1200 will have available.  That's without even delving into the off-screen bitmaps and other allocations that are catering for 32-bit mode.

16MB is probably cutting it fine, but 32MB isn't.  This page on amiga.org is taking up 6MB more than Google.  Bear in mind my NetSurf memory cache is set to 10MB, and PPC code takes up more memory than 68k code.  These figures are going to be really rough and aren't worth pouring over in that much detail.

I know OS4 is so bad design that it not show exact how many memory is free or memory a program use.

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 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.

It won't crash, it's well written to cope with such a situation.  At worst you'll get the semi-default "NetSurf is running out of memory" error.

[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 ?

[chris]

@bernd_afa

Yes, the default memory cache is 2MB.

As far as OS4's memory display is concerned, AFAIK it only "can't be trusted" as OS4 caches a load of stuff in memory which will be freed when necessary (although I'm pretty sure OS3 does this too, so Rigo might be referring to something else).  Quite frankly, this isn't the place for this discussion and neither do I really care how accurate or good OS4's memory system is at this point in time.  That's the last I have to say on that subject unless by some miracle it becomes relevant to porting NetSurf to OS3.

[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

[desiv]

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.

Not sure where (or if) this fits, as I lost track of this thread. ;-)

But, considering how many ACA1230's have sold, I'd be willing to bet there are many more Wedges with 64M of RAM and AGA graphics...  And I'm guessing many of them only have AGA graphics..

desiv

[Khephren]

@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.

[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.

[wawrzon]

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

[Khephren]

There are 1000's of computers that run software better than my Amiga, hell most PC's are a faster Amiga than my Amiga. Most PC's/mac/linux boxes are also faster and have a much larger software range than morphOS...but you still use it don't you? My A1200 is my hobby machine of choice, I don't need to justify myself to you, as to why I want new software for it.

To steal your comment:

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

As iv'e said If we get it running, it's a start. Alterations to the code base can happen from there. More coders will be willing to muck in once they see something running, the Same as happened with AROS, and I don't care if we start to wander away from the main fork either.

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

[utri007]

This is amiga forum and we use our amigas thing that could be done better with other computer systems.

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.

Maybe Olsen could have some interested to get involved this project?

[wawrzon]

please guys, bernd is not trolling even if it looks like that. given his record of engagement for 68k, even if he is an uae-guy, he just tries to be reasonable about what can be done given current ressources. lets be honest, it doesnt look like we have any magick coders around any more.
i personally am all for trying to get netsurf with a native frontend and see if this helps, but im a noob who isnt even able to do it even if i would like. artur at least did a sdl port with bernds and itix help, which is an achivement we should be grateful of. and bernd considers netsurf easier to maintain without too much amiga-code in it. thats his point. thats it.

and now back to topic, did anyone got any further with it in the meantime? i pass for the time being, sorry.