Author Topic: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests  (Read 1559 times)

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« on: May 31, 2020, 10:20:30 AM »
Yes, I know that it is little stupid dream that G5 can boot to Mac OS 9 ever, but...

...are there anybody even tested to boot the first G5 model with Mac OS 9 compatible AGP-card?
I think boot have to do from firewire-drive. Should machine have less than 2 GB memory?
Tester should have some skills to debug where boot stops. Or should first test machine be Xserve G5 cluster node and debug through RS-232?
Can Mac OS 9 boot without graphics-card?

BTW. I find information about IDE/SATA-card that is Mac OS 9 and also PCI-X (for G5) compatible:
http://www.macsense.com/product/storage/sua-100e.html
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2934
  • just a number
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 42
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #1 on: May 31, 2020, 11:12:39 AM »
I think boot have to do from firewire-drive.

sounds the safest for now.

Quote
Should machine have less than 2 GB memory?

i´d guess no. in a G4 it is fine with 2GB istalled, it just ignores the excess.

Quote
Or should first test machine be Xserve G5 cluster node and debug through RS-232?

no idea if a console could tell more than other forms of debugging - or if a console will get any kind of output at all from a non posix OS.

but i think the cluster node would be the coolest machine of all for audio applications or as render server. :)

Quote
Can Mac OS 9 boot without graphics-card?

yes. though i am not sure if this does not eventually depends on the hardware, too. an intel core2duo macmini for example can not boot headless without some trickery at the dvi port. (or at least you can not set a resolution)

i dont find it back, but someone who knows more already explained somewhere that the main issue is that a G5 processor simply has a completely different type of instruction set, so that you basically would have rewrite literally everything.
insert arbitrary signature here

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #2 on: May 31, 2020, 12:52:47 PM »
i dont find it back, but someone who knows more already explained somewhere that the main issue is that a G5 processor simply has a completely different type of instruction set, so that you basically would have rewrite literally everything.

Actually that cannot be true, because then any of G3/G4  Mac OSX programs cannot work in G5 (or of course in emulation they can work). There can be lot of difference and they can trapped with illegal instruction traps, but still it cannot be completely different type of instruction set.

I have to check it... ...I made fast reading "PowerPC® Microprocessor Family:The Programming Environments Manual for 32 and 64-bit Microprocessors" and I found:
"
An operating system that uses the bridge features does not take full advantage of the 64-bit implementation (for example, it can generate only 32-bit effective addresses).
An operating system that uses the 64-bit bridge architecture should observe the following:
The boot process should do the following: – ClearMSR[SF]. – Initialize the ASR, clearing ASR[V]. – Invalidate all SLB entries.
The operating system should do the following:
– Support only 32-bit applications.
– If any 64-bit instructions are used for example,to modify a PTE or a 64-bi tSPR,en sure either that exceptions cannot occur or that the exception handler saves and restores all 64 bits of the GPRs.
...
"
and some things more, that is not problem. It might be that G5 ROM-boot code start reading disks in 32-bit mode, so it might that bridge feature is default in start.
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline Protools5LEGuy

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2384
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 1018
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #3 on: May 31, 2020, 01:08:12 PM »
For G5 to boot Mac OS 9 there also is needed an Little Endian/ Big Endian converter/wrapper written in openfirmware or Forth or Pascal I guess.
Looking for MacOS 9.2.4

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #4 on: May 31, 2020, 01:12:13 PM »
For G5 to boot Mac OS 9 there also is needed an Little Endian/ Big Endian converter/wrapper written in openfirmware or Forth or Pascal I guess.

Why? G5 is Big Endian too like almost all processor except Z80 and x86.
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline Protools5LEGuy

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2384
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 1018
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #5 on: May 31, 2020, 03:43:47 PM »
You can be sure that I am not an expert on the subject, but I listened somewhere that the way G3 and G4 handle "Code" is different than G5 in that Little Endian/Big Endian Game.
Looking for MacOS 9.2.4

Offline Jubadub

  • Veteran Member (100+ Posts)
  • ****
  • Posts: 131
  • New Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #6 on: May 31, 2020, 03:58:22 PM »
You can be sure that I am not an expert on the subject, but I listened somewhere that the way G3 and G4 handle "Code" is different than G5 in that Little Endian/Big Endian Game.

AFAIK, that's only for virtual machine programs, which make use of endianness switching. G5 can't switch endianness like that (which is why, at same clock speeds etc., VirtualPC is slower on G5s), but that's about it.

In regards to Instruction Set Architecture (ISA), there are no concerns, as well, as the G5 contains a superset of earlier ISA implementations of earlier PPC processors. (Not too many new functions, though.) That's what the IBM docs reveal, anyway, last I checked.

Above all, to my knowledge, the main issue with the G5 is "mere" lack of drivers. Not sure which, though. Motherboard(s)? NorthBridge? G5 CPU recognition itself (just like how OS 8.6 doesn't recognize most G4s, supposedly)?

Anyway, I'm no expert, either. But looking at how other systems (GNU/Linux, BSD, MorphOS) boot into both G4s and G5s, they might be a good start. Also, starting with earlier G5s certainly sounds much wiser than with late G5s, that's for sure.

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2934
  • just a number
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 42
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #7 on: May 31, 2020, 07:08:13 PM »
funfact: if altivec stuff is run as altivec, it will run slower than on the G4 processor.
insert arbitrary signature here

Offline Jubadub

  • Veteran Member (100+ Posts)
  • ****
  • Posts: 131
  • New Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #8 on: June 01, 2020, 02:17:44 AM »
funfact: if altivec stuff is run as altivec, it will run slower than on the G4 processor.

At least in comparable configurations, yes (same clock, L2 cache etc.). Else, the G5 outperforms G4 simply due to sheer bruteness.

This means a 7448 G4 overclocked to 2.4 GHz (with some epic cooling solution) would outperform any G5 for AltiVec operations (unless if it's the Quad G5 and the app uses either 3 or 4 cores).
If only the 7448 upgrade was easy to find, and brand-new 7448s affordable...
Probably "easier" to just get OS 9 on G5s already. :P Then Talos.

Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2113
  • keep it simple
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #9 on: June 01, 2020, 01:03:57 PM »
The main issues to boot Mac Os 9 into a G5 Mac are the motherboard components that Mac Os 9 has no drivers for. The U3 and PCIe just to start with ...
Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline darthnVader

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 564
  • New Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #10 on: June 02, 2020, 04:45:42 AM »
The main issues to boot Mac Os 9 into a G5 Mac are the motherboard components that Mac Os 9 has no drivers for. The U3 and PCIe just to start with ...

I got the nano kernel log in qemu with kvm and mac99 machine model, but things halt there.

So the G5 cpu is still and issue, likely the lack of BATT registers.

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #11 on: June 02, 2020, 08:56:03 AM »
The main issues to boot Mac Os 9 into a G5 Mac are the motherboard components that Mac Os 9 has no drivers for. The U3 and PCIe just to start with ...
So the G5 cpu is still and issue, likely the lack of BATT registers.

But I don't mean last G5s with PCIe. I talking about first G5s with AGP and PCI-X. Of course there isn't drivers for motherboard components or is there in something usefull its 1 MB ROM or 3 MB toolbox ROM loaded into RAM?

Oh..it just read just before that I copy paste from PowerPC® Microprocessor Family: The Programming Environments Manual for 32 and 64-bit Microprocessors  :-[
"The bridge features do not conceal the differences in format of the page table, BAT registers, and SDR1 between 32-bit and 64-bit implementations—the operating system must be converted explicitly to use the 64-bit formats."
Good think that manual also says, when talking about BAT:s and memorymanagement: "However, if these features are not supported, attempting to execute these instructions on a 64-bit implementation causes an illegal instruction program exception." so you can catch that and make emulation.
Strange thing is that PowerPC® Microprocessor Family: The Programmer’s Reference Guide from 1995 (from PowerPC 60x age) at page 20 shows 32-bit and 64-bit BAT registers.

« Last Edit: June 02, 2020, 09:20:14 AM by teroyk »
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2934
  • just a number
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 42
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #12 on: June 02, 2020, 11:56:11 AM »
the operating system must be converted explicitly to use the 64-bit formats."

hm, and then RAM, next problem.

insert arbitrary signature here

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #13 on: June 03, 2020, 12:04:44 AM »
the operating system must be converted explicitly to use the 64-bit formats."
hm, and then RAM, next problem.

Actually when using that that bridge feature then RAM isn't problem.
I think Mac OS 9 doesn't try write over 4 GB memory not even 2 GB ;)
More problem comes using virtual memory, but we shut off it anyway.

I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #14 on: June 03, 2020, 10:06:17 AM »
BTW. Apple Hardware Test (v2.1.0) for first G5 looks like so Mac OS 9 style:
(removed look under why)
EDIT: and nice picture when running Apple Hardware Test v.2.2.5 with Powermac G4 with 3 GB RAM:
(removed look under why)
EDIT2:  :-[ I remove links, look under why
« Last Edit: June 05, 2020, 08:49:15 AM by teroyk »
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline Protools5LEGuy

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2384
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 1018
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #15 on: June 03, 2020, 12:23:35 PM »
Please, dont use direct "Hot-links" to the garden, or Knezzen will punish you.

It is cool to point to the page, but not cool to link files or pictures.

https://macintoshgarden.org/apps/apple-hardware-test-powermac-g4
Looking for MacOS 9.2.4

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #16 on: June 05, 2020, 08:26:26 AM »
Anyway my point with those AHT pictures was that last G4 and first G5 is not so far away that we think, but this is not topic for that,
look this topic if you are interested in more: http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php/topic,5537.0.html
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline nanopico

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 737
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #17 on: June 05, 2020, 12:56:19 PM »
I haven't done much with the G5 and OS 9 for a while, but my last attempt I was able to get it fairly far, by disabling a lot of devices in Open Firmware and booting from a CD.  If I remember correctly the point of failure I hit was hardware related as I had disabled so much there was nothing to run the system.   I also recall something with the way the G5 addresses memory even in a 32 bit mode that made OS 9 freak out.

Sorry I can't remember a lot of detail off the top of my head as this was before I had mental breakdown and before I was medicated so I do actually forget some of this stuff and what notes I had got trashed when I was pissed off one evening.    I did find a few tidbits in some backups I was reviewing a couple nights ago.

One thing I do remember for sure was that I got a little over excited about disabling devices in open firmware and almost bricked one of my G5.   I have since acquired a couple extra G5's so I guess I could start poking at this one again.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #18 on: June 06, 2020, 03:47:23 AM »
I haven't done much with the G5 and OS 9 for a while, but my last attempt I was able to get it fairly far, by disabling a lot of devices in Open Firmware and booting from a CD.  If I remember correctly the point of failure I hit was hardware related as I had disabled so much there was nothing to run the system.   I also recall something with the way the G5 addresses memory even in a 32 bit mode that made OS 9 freak out.

Do you remember what G5 model it was? I am very sure that booting from CD is not the best device with G5. Firewire might be only possible boot device and that with installed OS. Do you remember how much that G5 had memory? 
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #19 on: June 07, 2020, 02:05:16 AM »
The Xserve G5 has a build-to-order option of an ATI RV100 64 MB RAM VGA/PCI graphics card with a VGA connector. The ATI RV100 runs at 64-bit PCI 33 or 66 MHz.

And what else has RV100-chip…ATi Radeon 7000! and that is supported in Mac OS 9!

So can somebody test can you boot Powermac G4 to Mac OS 9 with that card?
or can somebody test can you boot (at least to OSX) Powermac G5 1.6 Ghz with that card?
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline darthnVader

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 564
  • New Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #20 on: June 07, 2020, 12:53:51 PM »
The Nano Kernel debugger and message log default to the serial port, but you can get it to also output to the screen, but you have no way to enter the interactive debugger without a serial port.

I think the modem can be put into serial mode for the nano_kernel debugger, but I never figured out how to do that?
« Last Edit: June 08, 2020, 01:56:02 PM by darthnVader »

Offline nanopico

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 737
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #21 on: June 08, 2020, 10:21:00 AM »
I haven't done much with the G5 and OS 9 for a while, but my last attempt I was able to get it fairly far, by disabling a lot of devices in Open Firmware and booting from a CD.  If I remember correctly the point of failure I hit was hardware related as I had disabled so much there was nothing to run the system.   I also recall something with the way the G5 addresses memory even in a 32 bit mode that made OS 9 freak out.

Do you remember what G5 model it was? I am very sure that booting from CD is not the best device with G5. Firewire might be only possible boot device and that with installed OS. Do you remember how much that G5 had memory?

It was a Dual 2.0 GHZ with the 4 memory sockets and PCI-X and it had 2GB of RAM at the time.  it was the only G5 I had at the time.  I know have a 1.6 GHZ PCI G5 which I suspect would be the easiest to get working, but not sure.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #22 on: June 08, 2020, 11:04:37 AM »
The Nano Kernel debugger and message log default to the serial port, but you can get it to also output to the screen, but you have no way to enter the interactive debugger without a serial port.

So Xserve G5 2Ghz with serial port will be good choice for debugging. But who has that?
Actually, Powermac G5 1.6Ghz has 56k-modem port, can we change it to serial port?
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #23 on: June 08, 2020, 11:33:06 AM »
Do you remember what G5 model it was? I am very sure that booting from CD is not the best device with G5. Firewire might be only possible boot device and that with installed OS. Do you remember how much that G5 had memory?

It was a Dual 2.0 GHZ with the 4 memory sockets and PCI-X and it had 2GB of RAM at the time.  it was the only G5 I had at the time.  I know have a 1.6 GHZ PCI G5 which I suspect would be the easiest to get working, but not sure.

Yes 1.6 GHZ PCI would be best. Your setup might have 2 potential problems Dual processor and PCI-X, but I am not 100% sure. Also from IBM PPC Manual "Processors that implement the 64-bit bridge divide the 32-bit address space into sixteen 256-Mbyte segments " so good start would be with one segment, just only 256 MB memory. It also might help that no need for BAT-array(!).
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline LarsG5

  • Valued Member (10+ Posts)
  • **
  • Posts: 15
  • New Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #24 on: June 14, 2020, 03:06:14 PM »
No AGP card used in any of the G5 machines is OS9 compatible per se. FX5200 works in a Cube, true, but no 2d/3d acceleration renders it useless anyway. So we would have to resort to PCI video cards, which kinda defeats the whole purpose other than to prove a point...

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #25 on: June 16, 2020, 01:24:34 AM »
So we would have to resort to PCI video cards, which kinda defeats the whole purpose other than to prove a point...

But it would be some kind of starting point...
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2934
  • just a number
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 42
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #26 on: June 16, 2020, 03:52:02 AM »
silly qustion but what happens if you put a x4 AGP card in the G5?
insert arbitrary signature here

Offline LarsG5

  • Valued Member (10+ Posts)
  • **
  • Posts: 15
  • New Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #27 on: June 16, 2020, 05:20:05 AM »
So we would have to resort to PCI video cards, which kinda defeats the whole purpose other than to prove a point...

But it would be some kind of starting point...

True, but still, it would only be a proof of concept rather than a great breakthrough. Still cool though.

On the other hand, flashing some PC video cards, that are potentially OS9 compatible and use "universal" x4/x8 AGP interface is also an option.

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #28 on: June 19, 2020, 12:04:36 PM »
silly qustion but what happens if you put a x4 AGP card in the G5?

It's not silly question...has anybody tested?
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline LarsG5

  • Valued Member (10+ Posts)
  • **
  • Posts: 15
  • New Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #29 on: June 19, 2020, 12:50:34 PM »
In best case scenario a Mac wouldn't power on, like it happens when you put an x8 card in x4 slot.
In x4 specs, pins 3 and 11 are left unused, but due to power draw of ADC monitors, they decided to supply some additional power via those two pins in x8 specification. Thats why you tape those two ping over when installing an x8 card in an x4 slot - otherwise the machine doesn't power on and simply acts like it's dead.

So yeah, best case scenario: the machine refuses to power on
Worst case scenario: magic blue smoke.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2020, 03:21:22 AM by LarsG5 »

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #30 on: June 21, 2020, 12:17:32 AM »
So maybe better use PCI for graphics card in the some first tests, but has somebody PowerMac G5 with PCI-slots for test?
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline LarsG5

  • Valued Member (10+ Posts)
  • **
  • Posts: 15
  • New Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #31 on: June 21, 2020, 03:23:20 AM »
That's exactly what I pointed out several posts earlier 🤣
It would be just much much easier this way - one less hassle to tackle 🤷🏼‍♂️

Offline Jubadub

  • Veteran Member (100+ Posts)
  • ****
  • Posts: 131
  • New Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #32 on: June 22, 2020, 11:45:39 AM »
This is a great initiative and pursuit, @teroyk, I'd love to hear more about your attempts and findings. Also, @nanopico, I hope you are doing better by now. And I'm also envious of your G5 collection. :)

So, let's see, to get things started, the ideal setup is:
- 1.6GHz 1st gen single-processor G5;
- A single 256MB RAM stick;
- PCI GPU Card, avoid AGP;
- Booting pre-installed OS 9 via FireWire preferred, at least at first. (Thoughts on USB?)

I was completely unfamiliar about processor-level hardware differences like the BAT registers. Goes to show what I really know about these processors. :) Now I wonder what else might be there that may pose a challenge. At worst, something(s) may have to be emulated or, alternatively, OS 9 itself to be patched.

Also, as I half-jokingly suggest here, could spoofing machine info (report it as an MDD, G4 processor etc.) have some potential of aiding down the line, I wonder?

So we would have to resort to PCI video cards, which kinda defeats the whole purpose other than to prove a point...

But it would be some kind of starting point...

True, but still, it would only be a proof of concept rather than a great breakthrough. Still cool though.

ROFL, this heavily understates the HUGE breakthrough it would be to boot OS 9 on G5s. 🤣

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #33 on: June 22, 2020, 01:17:21 PM »
- A single 256MB RAM stick;

I think memory have to be in pairs with G5 so two 128MB RAM sticks (And if I am right that was the default min. setup for G5 1.6Ghz)

- Booting pre-installed OS 9 via FireWire preferred, at least at first. (Thoughts on USB?)

And maybe via Firewire 800-port, because MDD2003 and some alu-Powerbooks see Firewire 800-port as Firewire 400 port with Mac OS9 and Firewire400 doesn't work, but maybe have to test both.

I was completely unfamiliar about processor-level hardware differences like the BAT registers. Goes to show what I really know about these processors. :) Now I wonder what else might be there that may pose a challenge. At worst, something(s) may have to be emulated or, alternatively, OS 9 itself to be patched.

Actually that BAT-register problem can good thing too, It can be help us to go "G5-side" for debugging time to time and that helps with another problems.

And actually how much Mac OS 9.2.2 use BAT-registers?
Is there little possibility that when Apple prepare for Classic between Mac OS 8.5-9.2.2 they drop use them as much that possible?
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline darthnVader

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 564
  • New Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #34 on: June 23, 2020, 06:31:45 AM »
Running Linux with KVM and Qemu will get you a lot further as far as G5 CPU support.

It uses the mac99( G4 AGP Sawtooth ) machine model, so you won't have to go about debugging and disabling all the hardware in the device tree that the Mac OS ROM doesn't know what to do with.

This will allow you to focus on the CPU.

You can check my thread:

http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php/topic,4600.msg36426.html#msg36426

I got the nano_kernel boot log, but never debugged any further to see why booting halted at the first line of the log.

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #35 on: June 23, 2020, 09:18:47 AM »
Running Linux with KVM and Qemu will get you a lot further as far as G5 CPU support.

Yes, but can I emulate with Qemu the Powermac G5 PCI 1.6GHz/256MB  from very beginning from boot from firewire?
And of course that kind of environment can have it's own errors.

I am interested is it started in 64-bit bridge (32-bit compatible) mode ? And what is first thing that crash, is it illegal instruction trap (because use of BAT-register) or what?
If it not start in bridge mode we have to put it in that mode before load OS and maybe setup illegal instruction trap to emulate BATs.
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline darthnVader

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 564
  • New Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #36 on: June 23, 2020, 05:28:30 PM »
From what I've read, you have to strip the device tree of major road-blocks like USB, leaving you with no means of I in IO.

I'd assume there could be some way of adding a true serial port to the G5, to overcome the lack of USB, if that's the rout you decide to take, but you are going to strip things way down just to get over the trampoline and to the nonokernel.

At some point you are going to have to go back and rewrite most of the Parcels file drivers, then you'll have to deal with the Mac OS drivers, with, pretty much, no source code.

Offline Jubadub

  • Veteran Member (100+ Posts)
  • ****
  • Posts: 131
  • New Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #37 on: June 25, 2020, 12:56:36 AM »
From what I've read, you have to strip the device tree of major road-blocks like USB, leaving you with no means of I in IO.

I'd assume there could be some way of adding a true serial port to the G5, to overcome the lack of USB, if that's the rout you decide to take, but you are going to strip things way down just to get over the trampoline and to the nonokernel.

At some point you are going to have to go back and rewrite most of the Parcels file drivers, then you'll have to deal with the Mac OS drivers, with, pretty much, no source code.

I'm pretty sure teroyk already knew there will be a rough road ahead. :) The roughness of it will be there regardless of the approach being via QEMU or real G5 hardware, like you pointed out. Disabling stuff just to get to the point it would start from QEMU is a relatively minor point, because that is the "easy" part.

And "no source code" or "pretty much, no source code", not exactly. Again, consulting with/porting over GNU/Linux, BSD and/or even MorphOS drivers & other code for G5s is still a possibility, for anyone serious. (Although even without any source code, it'd still not be impossible, but "just" a lot harder.)

As long as the individual is committed and serious enough about it, there is nothing to stop it from happening. That goes for nearly everyone regarding nearly everything. :)

Offline darthnVader

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 564
  • New Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #38 on: June 25, 2020, 04:11:30 AM »
From what I've read, you have to strip the device tree of major road-blocks like USB, leaving you with no means of I in IO.

I'd assume there could be some way of adding a true serial port to the G5, to overcome the lack of USB, if that's the rout you decide to take, but you are going to strip things way down just to get over the trampoline and to the nonokernel.

At some point you are going to have to go back and rewrite most of the Parcels file drivers, then you'll have to deal with the Mac OS drivers, with, pretty much, no source code.

I'm pretty sure teroyk already knew there will be a rough road ahead. :) The roughness of it will be there regardless of the approach being via QEMU or real G5 hardware, like you pointed out. Disabling stuff just to get to the point it would start from QEMU is a relatively minor point, because that is the "easy" part.

And "no source code" or "pretty much, no source code", not exactly. Again, consulting with/porting over GNU/Linux, BSD and/or even MorphOS drivers & other code for G5s is still a possibility, for anyone serious. (Although even without any source code, it'd still not be impossible, but "just" a lot harder.)

As long as the individual is committed and serious enough about it, there is nothing to stop it from happening. That goes for nearly everyone regarding nearly everything. :)

Having a working debugger like GDB is pretty much mandatory. 8)

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #39 on: June 25, 2020, 12:23:51 PM »
Having a working debugger like GDB is pretty much mandatory. 8)

GDB is not option (or is not good debugger anyway (my biased opinion)).

Very beginning of start we have to use Open Firmware debugging, some information might be here: http://www.dialectronics.com/Words/OF_Part_II.shtml
And here some information if somebody want use open firmware debug thru ethernet with telnet connection: https://www.fenestrated.net/mirrors/Apple%20Technotes%20(As%20of%202002)/tn/tn2023.html
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline darthnVader

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 564
  • New Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #40 on: June 25, 2020, 02:18:12 PM »
Having a working debugger like GDB is pretty much mandatory. 8)

GDB is not option (or is not good debugger anyway (my biased opinion)).

Very beginning of start we have to use Open Firmware debugging, some information might be here: http://www.dialectronics.com/Words/OF_Part_II.shtml
And here some information if somebody want use open firmware debug thru ethernet with telnet connection: https://www.fenestrated.net/mirrors/Apple%20Technotes%20(As%20of%202002)/tn/tn2023.html

I've never been able to get the Nano Kernel log from ethernet in two machine mode, I think it will dump only to serial?

I suppose you maybe, somehow, able to enter into the Nano Kernel interactive debugger, but good luck using it.

By all means, do things the hard way :P

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #41 on: July 05, 2020, 04:41:38 AM »
I've never been able to get the Nano Kernel log from ethernet in two machine mode, I think it will dump only to serial?
I suppose you maybe, somehow, able to enter into the Nano Kernel interactive debugger, but good luck using it.

By all means, do things the hard way :P

"in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one we intend to win, and the others, too" J.F.Kennedy
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2934
  • just a number
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 42
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #42 on: July 05, 2020, 08:00:46 AM »
and then he got shot
insert arbitrary signature here

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #43 on: July 06, 2020, 11:18:29 PM »
PowerMac G4 developer note from 2003 in page 20:
https://web.archive.org/web/20030701081015/http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G4/PowerMacG4/PowerMacG4.pdf
shows block diagram of Powermac G4 MMD (Firewire800)

Has somebody same kind of block diagram of PowerMac G5 single 1.6 Ghz PCI?

EDIT This file works! is for later G5 single 1.8Ghz PCI model:
http://mirror.informatimago.com/next/developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G5/PowerMacG5_SP/PowerMacG5_SP.pdf
« Last Edit: July 07, 2020, 02:58:12 AM by teroyk »
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2934
  • just a number
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 42
insert arbitrary signature here

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #45 on: July 07, 2020, 03:05:05 AM »
https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G5/PowerMacG5_SP/0Preface/Q78_pref.html

yes it's for 1.8 Ghz. It seems that it almost more differences between first dual G5 and second single G5 than Powermac G4 dual (firewire800) and first dual G5s.
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2934
  • just a number
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 42
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #46 on: July 07, 2020, 04:25:27 AM »
oh i missed that and i missed that you already found this exact file under another url. :P

though i would bet that the 1.6 looks the same except for PCI i can not garantee that. (to be exact, i have no clue.)
insert arbitrary signature here

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #47 on: July 07, 2020, 06:29:03 AM »
oh i missed that and i missed that you already found this exact file under another url. :P

though i would bet that the 1.6 looks the same except for PCI i can not garantee that. (to be exact, i have no clue.)

You was first I was edit that link when you have posted your links :)
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #48 on: July 07, 2020, 08:08:53 AM »
If it takes too hard to get memory down to 256 MB, maybe this might help:
Technical Q&A QA1099, Reducing the size of Physical Memory in Open Firmware
https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/qa/qa2001/qa1099.html
go down and there is hint for Mac OS 9 users too.
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.

Offline teroyk

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 219
  • -
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests
« Reply #49 on: Today at 09:06:43 AM »
First G5s has (P)ATA-interfaces for optical drives. Has anybody try to boot to OSX (or OS 9) with HD from there?
I bought my first new Mac when OS X 10.1 released. And I bought that Mac because it had Mac OS 9 too. And I bought my first 68k Mac when Apple stopped PPC Macs.