Hi,
I had few general problems I found during last demos
development that might be helpful for hatari team:
1) FPU emulation and opcodes that disappeared in 060
While doing LCF and SV2K18 Invitation and F22.0 I never
succeeded to work on any newer hatari version than 1.9.0.
Hatari 1.9.0 had a "fortunate bug" that internal 060 FPU
emulation still included FPU opcodes that were removed from
060 and existed in 040. I guess you corrected it in newer
version and it was "unfortunate fix" (as specifying external
fpu was not helping)
gcc4.6.4 produces those opcodes with (i use "-c -Wall
-m68060 -O3 --omit-frame-pointer") and they are properly
emulated by CT60 TOS so produced code is fully workable on
real hardware. Demo code is mix of C and assembler and FPU
codes are also handwritten, not only gcc generated.
(ofc this ct tos unimplemented fpu codes emulation is slow
so it is not for inner loop calculations hehe but totally fine
for setup code etc)
On hatari it runs properly on 1.9.0 using hatari_falcon.exe
and tos4.0.4 using internal 060 FPU. (eg LCF and SV2k18
Invitro)
I was not able to make it running on any newer hatari
version using neither internal fpu nor 68882. I was always
getting message about not implemented fpu opcode. (note: newer
versions does not contain hatari_falcon.exe so hatari.exe was
used)
2) F22.0 stopped running on 1.9.0 about week before Silly
Venture (was running fine earlier)
Although running on real hardware we started to get bus
error on 1.9.0 (only one working so far). The only thing we
were able to figure out is that difference was with just one
more image file being loaded from filesystem (using C api and
malloc etc). Not loading file made demo running again on 1.9.0
again. Sounds strange;)
3) VGA/RGB vbl rate
I am not 100% sure but had impression that in VGA mode vbl
is still 50hz instead of 60hz as my demo timing was off.
(would need to double check)
4) keyclick
We had a minor bug on real hardware that after returning to
TOS key click was gone. On hatari key click was still fine.
OFC it was just simple code to fix it in demo, but bug existed
only in real hardware so hatari was not 100% accurate there.
Well, I guess it is all I can tell about issues/bugs I
observed... I hope it might be useful. Thanks a lot for making
hatari! It roxx:)
Regards,
Maciej (MKM)
PS. Obvious observation is that 32MHz 060 Hatari is about
8x slower than real F060 with 66MHz but I guess it is obvious
and rather cannot be improved easily.