joe75 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 pentium d and pentium 4 with sse3 will work fine if your motherboard has HPET but 64-bit applications won't work. I think most motherboards already have that starting from ICH4 or ICH5 (I don't really remember). um... only working for C2D cpus right now i dont know where u get your info from... http://tgwbd.org/darwin/boot.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StarForge Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Almost too good to believe? Then again, this is netkas so wow, grats man! When we speak of 'modern' CPUs, does that include 'Core Duo' CPUs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
U.C. Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Nice work. Does this mean full driver support? ie No need for Natit etc?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Hurt Posted November 6, 2007 Author Share Posted November 6, 2007 um... only working for C2D cpus right now i dont know where u get your info from... http://tgwbd.org/darwin/boot.html The problem is not with the bootloader. It will work fine with any cpu. The problem is with OS X itself. For OS X to be fully functional without any kernel modifications, you'll need a core 2 cpu because it's the only one which has ssse3 which is used by OS X for running 64-bit instructions. Without a core 2 cpu, 64-bit applications won't work, but the boot loader and the rest of the OS will work fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaces Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 WOW! Congrats, cant wait to try this out, this is a GIANT step for the osx86 community! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soündless Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 {censored} yeah! im building a new core 2 duo rig soon so this is conveniant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDRacer48 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Well, Sounds like a good excuse to rebuild in the summer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azurael Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 The problem is not with the bootloader. It will work fine with any cpu. The problem is with OS X itself. For OS X to be fully functional without any kernel modifications, you'll need a core 2 cpu because it's the only one which has ssse3 which is used by OS X for running 64-bit instructions. Without a core 2 cpu, 64-bit applications won't work, but the boot loader and the rest of the OS will work fine. I don't see any reason why Pentium-Ds (and AMD64+SSE3 single core Pentium 4s for that matter) can't be run in 32-bit mode though, because Core Duo/Core Solo don't support SSSE3 either, and Apple has to support those in OS X's kernel. AMD is not going to happen with an unmodded OS though, due to the CPUID checks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alessandro17 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 The problem is that this will only work on modern computers. Core 2 and a motherboard with HPET are required. Other hardware like sse2 cpus or older 64bit cpus will still need some modifications to the kernel. Netkas is not planning on releasing it yet as he is still improving the emulation. Well, I guess it's time for me to buy a new computer now. A HPET enabled motherboard and a Core 2 don't need to cost a fortune. In fact they are pretty much standard on every semi-decent computer you buy now (or you can upgrade your own, of course). anyone know where i can find a cpu util so i can check if my cpu supports hpet ? AFAIK, it is the motherboard, not the CPU which supports HPET. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Hurt Posted November 6, 2007 Author Share Posted November 6, 2007 I don't see any reason why Pentium-Ds (and AMD64+SSE3 single core Pentium 4s for that matter) can't be run in 32-bit mode though, because Core Duo/Core Solo don't support SSSE3 either, and Apple has to support those in OS X's kernel. AMD is not going to happen with an unmodded OS though, due to the CPUID checks. I never said they won't work. I just said that "64-bit applications" will not work. Apart from that, everything else will work on any sse3 intel cpu installed on a motherboard with HPET. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 I never said they won't work. I just said that "64-bit applications" will not work. Offhand, do we have a list of which apps these are? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azurael Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 There are no 64-bit only apps outside of benchmarking as far as I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Envying Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 geekbench 64bit, but you have to pay for it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Hurt Posted November 6, 2007 Author Share Posted November 6, 2007 Offhand, do we have a list of which apps these are? Well.. To be honest with you, I don't know any 64-bit applications because I never use any. All I know is that 64-bit applications on os x with any processors other than core 2 will give a bus error. Thats what netkas said and why he wrote a fix for it in the kernel. By the way what does offhand mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Envying Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Chess in leopard is a 64bit program Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azurael Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Yes, but it's not 64-bit only. It's a fat binary containing 32 and 64-bit Intel and PPC versions (that's right, 4 binaries for one app is becoming the norm, folks...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Baron Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 By the way what does offhand mean? It means 'without thinking' or 'without preparation'. I think the poster was using it to mean 'from memory'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearcat Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 ... because Core Duo/Core Solo don't support SSSE3 either, ... I don't know where you were told that, but Core Duo/Core Solo DO support SSE3 On Page 7 in the introduction of the DataSheet for these processors, it clearly states that they support SSE2 and SSE3 instructions. http://download.intel.com/design/mobile/da...ts/30922106.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDRacer48 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 I don't know where you were told that, but Core Duo/Core Solo DO support SSE3 On Page 7 in the introduction of the DataSheet for these processors, it clearly states that they support SSE2 and SSE3 instructions. http://download.intel.com/design/mobile/da...ts/30922106.pdf No he said SSSE3. AS in 3 S's. There is SSSE3 and SSE3. Two different instruction sets... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nagal Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Hmmm time to rethink that new mobo I was getting ready to buy. Awesome news for sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearcat Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 No he said SSSE3. AS in 3 S's.There is SSSE3 and SSE3. Two different instruction sets... Ah, I stand corrected the Core 2 Duo have Supplemental. But that has nothing to do with booting an unmodified kernel on a core duo machine, because it already boots on the first gen macbooks, macbook pros and iMacs. If on a Pentium 4 or Pentium Dual with SSE3 and you're worried about accidentally executing a 64bit app from a fat binary, you can always add -legacy to your boot flags to boot the OS in 32 bit mode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azurael Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 I never said there would be a problem with Core chips (which aren't 64-bit in the first place and thus avoid the whole problem.) I just said that we'd have to ignore the 64-bit capabilities of chips which otherwise would be able to run OS X in 64-bit mode because they have AMD64 and SSE3 but not SSSE3 (which is basically Pentium 4 5x1/6xx-on and the Celeron equivalents, and Pentium Ds) in the case of running unmodified OS X, whereas we can have an SSSE3 emulator in the kernel for those chips and allow them to run a 64-bit kernel if we have compiled the kernel from source/patched it and aren't attempting to run an unmodified OS X install on generic hardware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newelement Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Would LOVE to see a new ToH DVD with new bootloader when 10.5.1 is released. Good news! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearcat Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 I just said that we'd have to ignore the 64-bit capabilities of chips which otherwise would be able to run OS X in 64-bit mode because they have AMD64 and SSE3 but not SSSE3 (which is basically Pentium 4 5x1/6xx-on and the Celeron equivalents, and Pentium Ds) in the case of running unmodified OS X, whereas we can have an SSSE3 emulator in the kernel for those chips and allow them to run a 64-bit kernel if we have compiled the kernel from source/patched it and aren't attempting to run an unmodified OS X install on generic hardware. OK, I'm a noob, please help me understand. A quick scan of the kernel shows that it does not execute any of the 16 SSSE3 instructions. The 64bit extension instructions are different instructions then the SSSE3 instructions which act on 64/128 bit registers. I realize there is a bug in the kernel when running 64bit apps on older processors. But how does running a 64bit app relate to SSSE3, when the kernel doesn't use it? I'm trying to understand how you made the connection from running a 64bit app on an older processor crashes to the newer processors have SSSE3? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azurael Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Because AFAIK, GCC4 when compiling apps for 64-bit OS X uses SSSE3, thus as more OS X apps start to contain AMD64 binaries, people with these CPUs running the 'unmodified' OS X which we're presumably going to be using soon are going to run into a brick wall running unless they specifically stip out the 64-bit binary, or take the easier solution and just run the 32-bit kernel which won't allow the 64-bit binaries to run and will just use the x86 version. Presumably this whole Leo being more 64-bit friendly means that some binaries which will benefit from 64-bit execution are going to get even bigger as they'll contain 4 versions, 32 and 64-bit PPC and x86 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts