←back to thread

245 points marcodiego | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0.475s | source
1. s-macke ◴[] No.45799633[source]
That’s fast. Buggy, but fast. I’m totally impressed! Especially because I researched the necessary steps to do the same thing 10 years ago based on [0]. The patches required for this hack touch LLVM, libc, Linux kernel, BusyBox, ... and total approximately 15,000 lines of code.

I ran a small performance test with 'bc -lq' and compared with [0]:

  scale=1000
  4*a(1)
This WASM architecture compilation completely blows away my old emulation setup, which only managed around 200 MIPS. Maybe this approach can be generalized. Running a full Linux distribution at near-native speed right in the browser would be awesome.

[0] https://github.com/s-macke/jor1k

replies(2): >>45804988 #>>45806493 #
2. Imustaskforhelp ◴[] No.45804988[source]
Your project was also really nice to play around with. I think it was one of the few which actually had an interesting idea including (blink), (copy.sh)

I generally preferred copy.sh more to be really honest. I have actually used it sometimes as a poor man's qemu. If I may ask, what are your thoughts on copy.sh as I found that its performance on busybox or (tinycore linux with gui) was so brilliant (the only downside was that the internet speed was abysmally slow, like for me really really slow.)

3. Y_Y ◴[] No.45806493[source]
What results did your benchmark get?
replies(1): >>45808439 #
4. s-macke ◴[] No.45808439[source]
By a factor of about 170. But this is more of a micro benchmark that gives you a rough idea. It's not a definitive figure.