PowerPC 601 port of linux ?

PowerPC 601 port of linux ?

Post by Iceland Bo » Fri, 30 Apr 1993 23:57:40



  Since there's all this talk about porting linux to Amigas and maybe
Macintoshes eventually, I'd like to throw a new player into the
field: the PowerPC 601.  Very likely, my next computer (whenever
that happens!) will be a PPC601 based machine.  (that is, if the
PPC even works out)  Personally, it looks to me as if the PPC 601
can put up a very significant struggle against the Pentium, based
on performance and, more importantly, cost.  My question is, how
difficult would it be to port linux to the PPC architecture?  How
many people would be interested in this?  

(Go easy on me!  I know NOTHING about the workings of the linux kernel,
nor the architecture of processors... I just sit around and sysadmin, honest!)

--Seth J. Morabito
  Cornell University Leech Farms
  "Mmmmm.. them's DAMN fine leeches!"
                    --A satisfied customer

 
 
 

PowerPC 601 port of linux ?

Post by Wen-Chun » Sat, 01 May 1993 02:41:00



>  Since there's all this talk about porting linux to Amigas and maybe
>Macintoshes eventually, I'd like to throw a new player into the
>field: the PowerPC 601.  Very likely, my next computer (whenever
>that happens!) will be a PPC601 based machine.  (that is, if the
>PPC even works out)  Personally, it looks to me as if the PPC 601
>can put up a very significant struggle against the Pentium, based
>on performance and, more importantly, cost.  My question is, how
>difficult would it be to port linux to the PPC architecture?  How
>many people would be interested in this?  

>(Go easy on me!  I know NOTHING about the workings of the linux kernel,
>nor the architecture of processors... I just sit around and sysadmin, honest!)

Me too. I'd like to know whether the community is prepared for the
introduction of PowerPC. Actually, it is very possible for
us to get ISA/EISA machines using PPC 601 chips, according to clarinet.
The entire Linux community should be prepared for a portable kernel
after 1.0 is out. I've got the feeling that, as long as Linux is
portable between CPUs (not necessarily bus structures), then Linux
is going to be the killer system.

Sure enough, the GNU Hurd should be able to run under PowerPC. BUT I
love the feel of Linux, whcich does not suffer from overhead.

--

-------------------------------------------------------------------
  "Great spirits have always encountered * opposition
        from mediocre minds..."    -- Albert Einstein

 
 
 

PowerPC 601 port of linux ?

Post by Bill Broadl » Sat, 01 May 1993 03:34:43


As far as performance the PowerPC is around 60 Specint92 and 80 SpecFP
running at 66 Mhz.

I believe the 66 Mhz part is CHEAPER then the current 486.

I fear that alot of the lowend RISC machines of the comming year may end
up Running Windows NT or other NON unix operating systems.

I believe linux kernel source is something like 95k lines of source and 5k
lines of assembly.  I would hope that with sufficient manuals that
most of the changes would be in the 5k lines of assembly.

Of course we have to wait and see but I'd fully support such a project.

--


Linux is great.         Bike to live, live to bike.                      PGP-ok

 
 
 

PowerPC 601 port of linux ?

Post by Thomas Dunb » Sat, 01 May 1993 05:44:53



 > ...I believe linux kernel source is something like 95k lines
 > of source and 5k lines of assembly.  I would hope that with
 > sufficient manuals that most of the changes would be in the 5k
 > lines of assembly.

/usr/src/linux > du -b -a >files
/usr/src/linux > fgrep .S files >files.s; fgrep .s files >>files.s
/usr/src/linux > fgrep .c files >files.c; fgrep .h files >files.h
/usr/src/linux > for i in files.?
  > do
  > awk '{a=a+$1}
  >     END {print a}' $i
  > echo $i
  > done
1946760
files.c
387939
files.h
139844
files.s

 for what that's worth..i don't think that the amount of code is very
relevant to porting difficulty.

 
 
 

PowerPC 601 port of linux ?

Post by Adam Goldbe » Sat, 01 May 1993 22:11:49



Quote:>As far as performance the PowerPC is around 60 Specint92 and 80 SpecFP
>running at 66 Mhz.
>I believe the 66 Mhz part is CHEAPER then the current 486.
>I fear that alot of the lowend RISC machines of the comming year may end
>up Running Windows NT or other NON unix operating systems.
>I believe linux kernel source is something like 95k lines of source and 5k
>lines of assembly.  I would hope that with sufficient manuals that
>most of the changes would be in the 5k lines of assembly.

Nope, most of the changes would be porting GCC & GAS to the Power PC;
it's kind of important to have a compiler & assembler.

--
Adam G.

The above is not to be construed in any way as the official or unofficial
statements of Microware, or any Microware employees.

 
 
 

PowerPC 601 port of linux ?

Post by Stephen Tweed » Mon, 03 May 1993 07:41:36




> > ...I believe linux kernel source is something like 95k lines
> > of source and 5k lines of assembly.  I would hope that with
> > sufficient manuals that most of the changes would be in the 5k
> > lines of assembly.
> [counting source lines?]
> 1946760
> files.c
> 387939
> files.h
> 139844
> files.s

Odd - I get

        [ascrib]sct: cd /usr/src/linux
        [ascrib]sct: cat `find . -name *.c -print`|wc
           74644  248502 1897641
        [ascrib]sct: cat `find . -name *.h -print`|wc
           13264   54034  387306
        [ascrib]sct: cat `find . -name *.S -print`|wc
            4650   14009  105028

So, including all comment lines and so on, that comes to about 75K
lines of C source, 13K headers and 4.5K assembly - pretty close to
Bill's original estimates.

Cheers,
 Stephen Tweedie.
---

Department of Computer Science, Edinburgh University, Scotland.

 
 
 

PowerPC 601 port of linux ?

Post by HJ L » Sat, 01 May 1993 04:22:21


[...]

|>
|>
|> Me too. I'd like to know whether the community is prepared for the
|> introduction of PowerPC. Actually, it is very possible for
|> us to get ISA/EISA machines using PPC 601 chips, according to clarinet.
|> The entire Linux community should be prepared for a portable kernel
|> after 1.0 is out. I've got the feeling that, as long as Linux is
|> portable between CPUs (not necessarily bus structures), then Linux
|> is going to be the killer system.

I seconded. How is the cost? I am more concerned with compiler.
Does PPC 601 have the same instruction set as RS/6000? I know
gcc supports RS/6000. But I haven't checked gas yet.

|>
|> Sure enough, the GNU Hurd should be able to run under PowerPC. BUT I
|> love the feel of Linux, whcich does not suffer from overhead.
|>
|>

H.J.

 
 
 

PowerPC 601 port of linux ?

Post by Rob Raint » Wed, 05 May 1993 05:28:28




>|> The entire Linux community should be prepared for a portable kernel
>|> after 1.0 is out. I've got the feeling that, as long as Linux is
>|> portable between CPUs (not necessarily bus structures), then Linux
>|> is going to be the killer system.

>I seconded. How is the cost? I am more concerned with compiler.
>Does PPC 601 have the same instruction set as RS/6000? I know
>gcc supports RS/6000. But I haven't checked gas yet.

The power PC sounds as though it may be a good platform to support,
there has been much discussion about this architecture on
comp.sys.intel (even though it is not an Intel chip).

Anyone interested in this area should check out the above newsgroup.

Rob.

 
 
 

PowerPC 601 port of linux ?

Post by Adam » Tue, 11 May 1993 07:20:54


Quote:>Nope, most of the changes would be porting GCC & GAS to the Power PC;
>it's kind of important to have a compiler & assembler.

That should be underway meanwhile ;->>...

I would imagine, that the real problem will be mapping 386--properties
(tables etc) to powerPC, perhaps following the Alpha/HAL approach,
designing your own instructions and implementing them in microcode to
be executed on your RISC system (I know, RISCs lack microcode per
definition, but please, before flame war starts, have a look at
gatekeeper.dec.com and the docs about alpha ...). OR clean up Linux
and discard all the Intel-dependencies ... ;-<

best, adams