• Re: Tidbits 02/19/93

    From KP2 KP2@21:1/5 to Peter Mayne on Sun Nov 26 18:14:38 2023
    On Tuesday, February 23, 1993 at 6:12:17 PM UTC-8, Peter Mayne wrote:
    In article <7001...@otter.hpl.hp.com>, s...@otter.hpl.hp.com (Steve Loughran) writes:
    I wonder if this is the first time hardware has been designed to
    fit the OS?

    Actually, it isn't.

    VAX/VMS
    OS/400 -> AS/400
    SPARC for UNIX (and most RISC CPUs, for that matter)
    8086 (for some kind of CP/M compatibility)
    The CRISP processor specifically designed for C (see a recent Byte)

    Peter is right in that RISC CPUs are normally optimised for the code which >is to be run on it, and given the amnout of CPU time the OS invariably >consumes that the OS must be used to determine which instructions
    to provide[*] .Also things like memory protection models ought to match, >otherwise you get CPU designers coming up with bizarre segmented memory >architechtures when all us hackers want is a flat memory model ;-)

    (but not Alpha 8->)

    You mean no-one had a look at the instruction usage of any unix before >designing the architecture? Surely they didnt just use VMS.
    The designers looked at application instruction usage. OS specific stuff
    can be (and is) implemented in PALcode. Thus, OSF/1 isn't burdened by
    OpenVMS features, Windows NT isn't burdened by OSF/1 features, etc, etc.
    Oh yeah. MIPS processirs have had two endian modes for a long time. Something
    to do with VaxStations I believe.
    Only in the sense that DEC's MIPS chips ends are at the same end as VAXen ends.
    Steve
    [*] cynics may argue that in fact most modern RISC CPUS are optimised purely >for impressive benchmark figures.
    A tempting argument... ;-)
    PJDM
    --
    Peter Mayne | My statements, not Digital's.
    Digital Equipment Corporation |
    Canberra, ACT, Australia | "AXP!": Bill the Cat
    a

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)