Show HN: I486SX_soft_FPU – Software FPU Emulator for NetBSD 10 on 486SX

github.com

107 points by mezantrop a day ago

First Release is Here!

I'm excited to announce the first release of i486SX_soft_FPU — a software FPU emulator for the classic Intel 486SX CPU, running on NetBSD 10!

This project brings floating-point support back to life for 486SX machines, even though modern NetBSD versions no longer natively support processors without a hardware FPU. If you're into retrocomputing, operating system hacking, or just love old-school hardware, check it out!

Project page: https://github.com/mezantrop/i486SX_soft_FPU Contributions, feedback, and testing are all very welcome!

Let's keep these vintage machines alive!

#retrocomputing #NetBSD #486SX #opensource

accrual a day ago

This is super cool and I'm very glad to see such work! Does NetBSD natively support the 486DX CPUs which still have the FPU enabled?

I know OpenBSD dropped support for i486 in 6.8, making 6.7 the last that runs natively on them (FPU or not). The support was lost when moving to LLVM 9 and enabling `-march=i586 on i386`. However, old Socket 3 boards can still run the latest version of OpenBSD if one drops a Pentium Overdrive in. :)

  • dcassett 17 hours ago

    > Does NetBSD natively support the 486DX CPUs which still have the FPU enabled?

    According to [1] they do

    "Any i486 or better CPU should work - genuine Intel or a compatible such as Cyrix, AMD, or NexGen."

    [1] https://wiki.netbsd.org/ports/i386/

userbinator 19 hours ago

Not only the 486SX but a lot of alternative x86 SoCs aimed at embedded systems have no FPU, including the original Vortex86.

natas 21 hours ago

I wonder if this means we will soon be able to run Netbsd-10.1 (and above) on MiSTer with ao486 core.

rzzzt a day ago

That .jpg in the readme file loaded from right to left. What is this sorcery?

  • quotemstr a day ago

        Z$ identify -verbose weird-jpeg.jpg
    Image:
      Filename: weird-jpeg.jpg
      ...
      Orientation: RightTop
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
      ...
      Properties:
        ...
        unknown: iPhone 12 Pro
  • adzm a day ago

    Pretty sure it's orientation in the jpeg itself

  • actionfromafar a day ago

    Apparently¹ :

        <img align="right">
    I'm also impressed. :-D

    1: https://github.com/mezantrop/i486SX_soft_FPU/blob/main/READM...

    • accrual a day ago

      The align tag isn't related, the image will load right-to-left even if opened by itself in a new tab.

      In JPEGSnoop I see Raw Image Orientation = Landscape. Maybe it was taken and encoded horizontally and the image itself is stored in a right-to-left scan order.

queenkjuul a day ago

This is awesome. I'm working on packaging a Linux distro for my 386 and 486, but I've stuck to just using very old kernels.

bezko 7 hours ago

What are some examples of an OS needing to do floating point numbers calculations?

hsnewman a day ago

I tried it under the Misterfpga ao486 core and it failed, not finding a partition to boot from. :(

Turboblack 12 hours ago

finally something really useful, I wish you creative success, you are doing the right thing

dlachausse a day ago

These used to be very common before Pentium processors. Many (most?) compiler tool chains included a software FPU emulator.

Very cool project!

  • rasz 18 hours ago

    Duke Nukem 3D is compiled with FPU emulation. Game engine is 99.9% fixed point math, only requires FPU for rarely used slopes (setupslopevlin_ and slopevlin_).

    It just so happens first room when starting the game - rooftop - has sloped roof vents and later walls with sloped edge. Even on fast FPUless 90MHz NexGen Nx586 (AMD K6 father) FPS drops down to 10-14fps on that roof https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41O2bNG2qKA&t=234s while staying above 30 when facing away from slopes.

    • anthk 14 hours ago

      Could a table help there?

  • actionfromafar a day ago

    I think GCC didn't have the emulating library, but the operating system had. (Such as Debian.) So you could compile and link your programs against a soft-float library. ( Something like this https://github.com/ant6n/ieeelib )

    What this NetBSD project does is not exactly like that though, it lets programs use regular 487 float instructions, which are trapped by the kernel, which steps in and emulates what the hardware float instruction would have done.

    It worked very well for regular program, because most programs would not use float instructions to any significant degree.

    If you however were going to use floats a lot for long calculations, a soft-float library would be much faster.

    • queenkjuul a day ago

      Funny enough, I've been compiling a lot of stuff for 386 Linux lately. You can build a kernel with built in software floating point, at which point it doesn't matter what your library/compiler do. If your kernel isn't built to handle that, you can build glibc with floating point emulation.

      At least this is my impression, working with 2.2.x/2.4.x kernels, gcc 2.7~3.3, and glibc ~2.2

      • anyfoo a day ago

        Yap. But as hinted by the comments before you, if you have CPUs without FPUs, you probably want to enable userspace (e.g. glibc) soft math support anyway, since it doesn’t have the overhead of trapping the instructions and context switching into the kernel and back.

        The benefit of OP’s solution in the kernel is that it works for everything out of the box, including pre-compiled binaries, and those that you can’t rebuild for whatever reason to begin with.

evmar 17 hours ago

I noticed math_emulate.c comes from Linux (it even has a " * (C) 1991 Linus Torvalds" bit on it). I was wondering what the license on that code is. It looks like Linux adopted GPL in 1992 so maybe this copy predates that, but it was under some other non-BSD license before that.

  • einr 15 hours ago

    The full license for Linux prior to 0.12 was:

      This kernel is (C) 1991 Linus Torvalds, but all or part of it may be
  redistributed provided you do the following:

  - Full source must be available (and free), if not with the
    distribution then at least on asking for it.

  - Copyright notices must be intact. (In fact, if you distribute
    only parts of it you may have to add copyrights, as there aren't
    (C)'s in all files.) Small partial excerpts may be copied
    without bothering with copyrights.

  - You may not distibute this for a fee, not even "handling"
    costs.
    This is clearly written by someone who has no business writing software licenses ;) but does not appear to be incompatible with the BSD license and in fact, the code in question originates from 386BSD (https://github.com/386bsd/386bsd/blob/2.0/usr/src/kernel/mat...) and made it from there into the NetBSD mainline.
    • nikanj 14 hours ago

      I don't think the BSD license is compatible with "you may not distribute this for a fee"

      • LeFantome 6 hours ago

        The GPL has wrongly taught us to focus on “compatibility”. Compatibility is pretty much exclusively a copyleft issue.

        There is no reason that you cannot use this code with this license in a larger BSD work. It is “compatible” in that sense.

        This specific code has additional restrictions (not charging). That does not add any restrictions to the rest of the code though.

        So, if you are charging, you are in violation of the license just for this code snippet. Linus Torvalds, the copyright holder, could try to enforce the license against you. Since he gives it away, no financial damages. Which means the remedy would be that you would not be able to use this code anymore (but could still use the rest of BSD).

        I do not expect Linus to pursue enforcement on this one.

        It would be a very difficult case to win anyway as you would have to prove that people were being charged specifically for the Linus code and not for other code covered by BSD (which allows charging).

        I would argue that this license has not even been violated, unless somebody has put a price tag on this specific code.

      • einr 14 hours ago

        True! And if so, that license has clearly been broken many times by everyone selling 386BSD, NetBSD and Linux <0.12 on CD-ROMs etc ;)

        Then again -- and IANAL -- the license is worded so vaguely that I doubt any of it is enforcible. "You may not distibute this for a fee" -- what is "this"? Is it the entire kernel or does it apply to small excerpts of it? Because apparently "small partial excerpts may be copied without bothering with copyrights". But do you mean copyright attribution or are you rescinding your copyright entirely if I only copy "small partial excerpts"? But what is a small partial excerpt? And so on and so forth...

        • LeFantome 6 hours ago

          “this” is the code that Linus licensed as he did. Only that code. If you use a snippet, that snippet is governed by the license. The license does not magically extend to other code or even to any modifications that have been made since. This is not the GPL.

        • wkat4242 14 hours ago

          I think nikanj means that this is not a stipulation of the BSD license at all, that's why it's not compatible with what Linus made there.

          • LeFantome 6 hours ago

            But the Linus license has no bearing on the rest of the code base at all.

            The entire concept of “compatibility” is an artifact of copyleft. In the rest of the license universe, each piece of code is covered by its own license and it does not matter what licenses other code uses.

            This license does not apply to the rest of BSD. The BSD license does not apply to this code.

      • yjftsjthsd-h 6 hours ago

        Why not? BSD style licenses generally just impose constraints around liability and attribution; I can't see any reason why that wouldn't be compatible with a separate constraint on charging money. IANAL, though, so take with grain of salt.

esafak 20 hours ago

[flagged]

  • LukeShu 20 hours ago

    It's not emulating a crippled chip, it runs on the i486SX (which has no FPU, by artificial limitation or not), and emulates an x87 FPU.

    • dcassett 18 hours ago

      > It's not emulating a crippled chip

      "Initial reviews of the i486SX chip were generally poor among technology publications and the buying public, who deemed it an example of crippleware." [1]

      [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/486sx

      EDIT: I get your point but this is what OP was referring to