[Simh] The new Makefile

[Broer van Smeden]

Dear Larry,

Till now, I've not really the discussion about the use of the makefile. I'm
only running a vax here, (OpenVMS 7.3) on my P4 2.8 Ghz, running WXP

And think that at least is much faster than the old hardware.

Even I've never compiled any module, however, I expect to get a alpha server
ds-10 within this year.

After that, I want to move my vax environment to AXP and probably build my
own binary. (since that's what I normally do on OpenVMS).

For that, I don't use MMS, be the freeware MMK (Madgoat make), which can
handle a normal make file (as well mms scripts).

In this case, compiling will only compile the modified sources, but of
course the linking will take some time (I expect less than 10 seconds on the
DS-10), because that AXP is quite faster than the 64 bit machine from around
1995. So if you want to change the code, "make" is the right way

Maybe you have the possibility to upgrade to OpenVMS 7.3-2. This might speed
up your system, because that VMS version has many improvement made for the
IA64 port of OpenVMS.

 

Kind regards,

 

Broer

 

  _____  

Van: simh-bounces at trailing-edge.com [mailto:simh-bounces at trailing-edge.com]
Namens Larry Baker
Verzonden: Friday 19 September 2008 21:25
Aan: simh at trailing-edge.com
Onderwerp: Re: [Simh] The new Makefile

 

I have not compared the SIMH V3.8 Makefile with the replacement proposed by
Philipp.  I have converted the SIMH V3.4 descrip.mms file (the OpenVMS
equivalent of a Makefile) to a DCL command procedure (the OpenVMS equivalent
of a shell script or batch file), make.com, for compiling with DEC C on
OpenVMS/Alpha and OpenVMS/VAX.  I compiled everything using our 333 MHz
AlphaServer 1000A 5/333 (OpenVMS V7.2-1) and MicroVAX 4000-100 (OpenVMS
V6.2) cluster.  As you know, these are VERY slow computers compared to any
modern PC or Mac.  I did not find the time it took to compile objectionable.
I liked that I could see everything that went into each simulator in one
command line.

 

My experience is that I recompile the simulator I use (MicroVAX) maybe once
or twice when a new release looks interesting.  I don't usually have to do
that more than once a year or two.  I am not concerned with the time that
takes.  I am concerned about the performance of the simulator.  My
preference is to provide the compiler with every opportunity at compile time
to optimize the generated code, specifically, by aggressively inlining
procedures and, when that is not possible, by making full use of
inter-procedural optimizations (IPOs).  My impression is that the practice
of separately compiling every module makes this more difficult, if not
impossible, which makes me favor the current Makefile method.  Of course
this assumes SIMH benefits from inlining and IPOs.  My bias, when choices
have to be made, is to prefer alternatives that make the SIMH executable run
faster, even if that increases the compilation time.

 

Larry Baker

US Geological Survey

650-329-5608

baker at usgs.gov

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/pipermail/simh/attachments/20080919/fca6fb33/attachment-0003.html>