In article <7001...@otter.hpl.hp.com>, s...@otter.hpl.hp.com (Steve Loughran) writes:a
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. SomethingOnly in the sense that DEC's MIPS chips ends are at the same end as VAXen ends.
to do with VaxStations I believe.
SteveA tempting argument... ;-)
[*] cynics may argue that in fact most modern RISC CPUS are optimised purely >for impressive benchmark figures.
PJDM
--
Peter Mayne | My statements, not Digital's.
Digital Equipment Corporation |
Canberra, ACT, Australia | "AXP!": Bill the Cat
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 546 |
Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
Uptime: | 166:18:16 |
Calls: | 10,385 |
Calls today: | 2 |
Files: | 14,057 |
Messages: | 6,416,528 |