Digital PDFs
Documents
Guest
Register
Log In
XX-5F607-77
November 1975
14 pages
Original
1.1MB
view
download
Document:
Bell Strecker What we learned fm PDP-11
Order Number:
XX-5F607-77
Revision:
Pages:
14
Original Filename:
Bell_Strecker_What_we%20_learned_fm_PDP-11c%207511.pdf
OCR Text
ABSTRACT Gordon Bell, November 8, William 1975 Il. Strecker COMPUTER STRUCTURES: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED FROM THE PDP-ll? Over the FDP-11’S six year life 20,000 specimens have been built based on 10 species (models). was a design goal, Al though range the actual it was unquantified; has exceeded expectations range (5OO:l in memory size and system The range has stressed the price]. mini (mall computer baa ic architecture along all dimensions. The marn PM.5 structure, i.e. the has been adopted as a de UNIBUS, facto standard of interconnection and minicomputer many micro for The architectural systems. experience gained in the design and use of the PDP-11 will be described terms Of its environment in (initial goals and constraints, the technology, and organization that designs, builds and distributes the machine). behave in a particular Where does it get inputs? does it formulate and problems? about 1.0 one might think that computer architecture is the sole determinant of a machine, it is merely the focal point for a specification. A computer is a product Of its total environment. Thus to fully understand the POP-11, it is necessary to understand its environment. Org. shows Figure the various groups (factors) affectrng a indicate the COmQUte r . The lines flow of primary information for product functional behavior and for QrOdUC t specifications. The physical flow of goods is nearly the same 1 ines, but more along starting with direct: aQQ1 ied technology semiconductor (e.g., manufacturers), going through computer manufacturing, and finally to the service personnel before turned over to being the Einal user. 1. The as they affect development is the of makes The final user, who OUtQUt. receives the BACKGROUND nature of engineer ing be goal oriented--the much no exception, with on deliverable products. Hence, it is difficult to plan for lifetime. a long and extensive more Nevertheless, the 11 evolved rapidly and over a wider range than we expected, placing unusual stress on even a carefully planned Systemhas evolved under The 11 family market and implementation group pressure to build new machines. In been this the plannrng has way with asynchronous and diffuse, A distributed development . decentralized organization provides checks and balances since it is not point, all under a single control of of ten at the expense the compatibility. Usually, hardware has been designed, and the software 1.5 modified to provide compatibility. technology--it is to understand the components that are available to build from, as they directly affect the resultant designs. nature that 4. It is projects 11 is pressure basic The organrzatron--what fundamentai organrzatron DEC The rest of the includes organization--this assoc ia ted applications groups with market groups # sales, service and manufacturing. 2.0 important 2. 3. There are an ever increasing number of groups who feel compel led to them control all products bringing all common norm : the government (“5) , testing groups such as Underwriters Laboratory, and the voluntary standards groups such as ANSI and CBEWA. Nearly all these some groups affect the design in or another (e.g. by reguir ing way time). Although parts, are: HOW solve Note, that if we assume that a QrOduc t is done sequentially, and each stage has a gestation time of about two years, it takes roughly basic eight years for an idea from research to finally appear at the user’s site. Other organizations affect design : ala0 the competitors establish a (they level and determine the deaign product life): and government IsI and standards. TNTRODUCTTON The relevant the desrgn way? the it 138 the to plannrnq, the Indepenaen t of the machrne has been very successful in and wrth the the marketplace, written for it. sys terns prbgrams In the DaDer (Bell et al, 1970) we with market f irs’t concerned are Features and use. acceptance carried to other designs are also a contributes to measure of how it and are of structures computer secondary importance. made to increase its address space. In retrospect, rt IS clear that since memory pr Ices decline at 26% to 413 per and many users year, tend to constant dollar buy systems, then every two or three year 5 another bit is requrred for the physical address space. - successful in The PDP-11 has been with over 20,000 the marketplace computers in use (1970-1975). It unclear how rigid a test (aside i:orn the marketplace) we have given since a large and the design and sales aggressive marketing coupled with sof twace organization, architectural to cover inconsistencies and omissions, can There was save almost any design. difficulty in teaching the machine this required a to new users: effort. On the other large sales various machine and operating hand, still are to capabilities systems be 2.1 Lack of stacks (weakness 3) has been solved, uniquely, with the auto-increment/auto-decrement addressing mechanism . Stacks are used extensively in some languages, and generally by most programs. used. GOALS AND CONSTRAlNTS Weakness 2 of not enough registers was solved by providing eight 16-bit registers: subsequently six more 32-bit registers were added for floating point arithmetrc. The number of registers has proven adequate . More registers would just increase the context switching time, and also perhaps the programming time by posrng the allocation dilemma for a compiler or a programmer. Weakness 4, limited interrupts and slow con tex t switching has been generally solved by the 11 UNTEIJS vectors which direct interrupts when a request occurs from a given I/O device. - 1970 1970) The paper (6ell et al, beg inning described the design, with weaknesses of minicomputers to remedy other goals and constraints. These will be described tr iefly in provide a this section, to framework, but most discussion of aspects of the the individual machine will be described later. Byte hand1 ing (weakness 5) was provided by direct byte addressing. iiead-only memory (weakness 6) can used directly without special programming since all procedures tend to be pure (and reentrant) and can be programmed to be recursive (or multiply reentrant). Read-only memories are used extensively for bootstrap loaders, debugging programs, and normal now provide console functions (in program) using a standard terminal, be address Weakness 1, that of limited for capability, was solved its rmmediate future, but not with the have been. finesse it might this has been a costly Indeed, oversight in redundant development and sales. Very elementary (weakness by a better but so far, have not been can is only one mistake that in a computer design that be made recover from--not is difficult to providing enough add:zis bits for addressing memory memory followed management _ The PDP-11 the unbroken tradition of nearly computer. Of course, every known rule of there is a fundamental other ) computer (and per haps designs which helps to alleviate well-designed this problem: any machine can be evolved through at least one major change. It is extremely embarrassing that the 11 with memory had to be evolved management only two years after the the paper was written outlining goal of providing increased address space. All predecessor DEC designs have suffered the same problem, and only the PDP-10 evolved over a ten year period before a change was There 7) processing I/O is partially provided interrupt structure, I/O processors per se implemented. Weakness 8 suggested that we must have a family. Users would like to move about over a rangyof models. High programming costs (Leakness 9) should be addressed because users program in machine language. Here we have no suggest data to improvement. A reasonable comparison would be programming costs on an 11 versus other machines. We built more complex systems (e.g., operating sys terns, computers) with 11 than with the simpler structures (e.g. PDP-8 or 15). Also, some systems programmrng is done usrnq higher level languages. 139 Another constcalnt lenq th had to eight bits. While expensive within lnvestmenc the was this has DEC because in 12, 18 and At least two organizations have machines with similar bus and ISP structures (use of address modes, behavror of registers as program counter and stack); and a third organization hdS offered a plug-replacement system for sale. word of been be in multiples mdde of our 36 bit effect has probably been war thwhile . The is quite notron of word length meaninqless in machines like the 11 and the IBM 360 because data-types varying lengths, and are of instructions tend to be in multiples of 16 bits. However, the addressing of memory for floating point is inconsistent. sys terns, the net been The UNIBUS structure has accepted by many designers as the PMS This structure. is interconnect ion scheme especially used in microprocessor designs. as part of the Also, UNIBUS design, notion of the I/O data and/or control mwerng registers into the memory address space has been used often in the microprocessor since it designs eliminates instructions in the ISP and requires no control to extra the I/O section. Structural flexibility (modularity1 was an impor tan t goal. This succeeded beyond expectations, and is discussed extensively in the part on PMS, in par titular the UNIBIJS section. Finally, we were concerned in 1970 that be there would offsprings--cledrly no problem: there have been about ten implementations. In fact, the family is large enough to suggest need of family planning. There was not an explicit goal of microprogrammed implementation. Since large read-only memories were available at the time of the not Model 20 implementation, microprogramming was not used. Unfortunately, all subseouen t machines have been microproqrammed but with some additional difficulty and expense because the initial design had poorly allocated but more opcodes, impor tan t the condition codes behavior was over spacified. 3.0 The computers we build are strongly influenced by the basic electronic case of technology. In the information computers , electronic processing technology evolution has been used to mark the four generations. was also stated that seems to have been missed. The initial handbook was terse and as such the machine saleable to those was only who really understood computers. It is not clear what the distribution of first users was, but probably all had previous computing experience . A large number of machines were sold to extremely knowledgeable users the universities and laborato:?es. The second handbook cdme out in 1972 and helped the learning problem somewhat, but it is still not clear whether a user with no previous computer experience can determine how to use a machine from the information in the handbooks. Fortunately, two comw.8 ter science tax tbooks (E&house, 75; and Stone and Siewiorek, 75) have been written baaed on the 11 to assist in the learning problem. Understandability to be a TECHNOLOGY goal, 3.1 Effects Memory De8igns On computer beqdn 1969 1. in Core memory (program) eventual FEATURES THAT HAVE MIGRATED TO OTHER COMPUTERS AND OFFSPRINGS A suggested test was the features (Hell that et al 1970) have migrated into designs. We. competitive reluctant t0 use VariOUS 1dedS. 140 with the primary for with an memory trend memory. toward 2. A comparatively smdll number of high registers for speed general processor state (i.e. registers), with a trend toward register larger, higher speed files at lower cost. Note, only 16 word read-write memories were avdilableat design time. 3. Unavailability of speed read-only have not fully permitted this test because some basic features are hence, non-DEC desrgners patented: are .%&conductor PDP-11 Model set ies design the Model 20. Subsequently, 3 models were introduced as minimum cost, best cost/performance, and maw imum The memory performance machines. several technology in 1969 formed constraints: The PDP-11 semiconductor 2.2 Of The large, h iqh memories, microprogrammed permitting a the design of the approach to for ca Note, not control part. read-only memory was paper, al though slow, unavailable read-only MOS was available for character generators. These constraint5 desrgn following attitudes: established principles 5. It should be asynchronous and accepting various capable of conf iqurations of memories in sire and speed. 2. to should be expandable, take advantage of an eventually laraer number of resisters for data-types and improve more context switching time. Also, would Fermi t registers more memory to eventually mapping machine and provide a virtual protected multiprogramming. It 3. It could be relatively complex, so that an eventual microcode approach could be used to advantage . New data-types added to the could be set to increase rnstruction though performance even they added complexity. 4. The UNIBUS width would be relatively wide, to get as much performance as possible, since LSI was not yet available to encode functions. 3.2 Variations In PDP-11 Through Technology Models Improve performance through force with faster The 11/45 and 11/70 memories. bipolar fast MOS uses and memory. brute 2. Microprogramming (see improve performance more complex ISP floating point). 3. Mu1 tiple copies of processor state (context) to improve time to switch context among various runnlnq programs. 4. Additional additional floatrnq point by one another. Improve performance by mapping multiple programs Into the same physical memory, giving each program a virtual machine. Providing the last two points requires ;I signif icant increase in the number of reqlsters (i.e. at least 64 word fast memory arrays). 4.0 THE ORGANIZATION OF PEOPLE The two usual problems of design : inexperience and “second-systemitis”. The first problem is simply a resources problem. Are there people available? their What are backgrounds? Can a small grow work effectively on architectural definitions? Perhaps most important is the principle, that no matter who is the architect, the design must be clearly understood by at least one person. are below) to through a (i.e., registers data-types--i.e., arithmetic. from reliabilrty (protectrngj Three types of design are based both on the technology and the cost and performance considerations. The nature of this tradeoff is shown in Figure DS. Note, that one starts at 0 cost and performance, proceeds to add cost, to achieve a base of Iminimum level functionality). At this point, certain minimum goals are met: for the computer, it is that simply there is program counter, and the simplest arithmetic operations can be carried out. It is easy to show (baaed on t:iwTurinq machine) that only a Instructions are required, and from these, any program can be written. From this minimal point, performance increases very rapidly in a step fashion (to be described later I for quite sometime (due to fixed overhead of memories, cabinets, powar, etc.) to a point of inflection where the cost-effective solution is found. At this point, performance continues to increase until another point where the performance maxim ixed . is Increas rng the size imp1 ies physical constraints are exceeded, and the machine becomes unbuildable, and the performance can go to 0. There is a general tendency of all designers to “n+l” (i.e., incrementally add to the design forever) . No design is so complete , that a redesign can’ t improve it. Semiconductor memory (read-only and resd-wr i te) were used to tradeoff coat performance across a reasonably wide range of models. Various techniques baaed on semiconductors are used in the tradeoff to provide the range . These include: 1. the 6. the and 1. Improve lsolatlng program for Second-systemitis Of def ininq of past 141 is the phenomenon a system on the basis sya tern history. the Invar Iably, problems.. past unbulldable. 4.1 PDP-11 Some of initially system . border solves ing on for securrty) project started up, design and planning were disarray, since Data General hi: been formed and was competing with the PDP-8 usrng a very small 16-bit computer . Al though the Product Line former Manager, d engineer the (NM) for PDP-8, had the responsibility this time, the new project manager was mathematrcian/programmer followeda by another manager (RC) who had managed the PDP-8. Work proceeded for several months based on the DCM and with a design review at Carnegie-Mellon University in late 1969. The DCM review took only a few minutes. Aside from a general dullness and a feeling that it was too little too late to compete. It was difficult to program (especially compilers). by However, it’s benchmark results were good. (We believe it had been tuned to the benchmarks, hence couldn’ t do other problems very well.) One of the designers (HM) brought along the kernel of an which turned out to be alternative, the PDP-11. We worked on the design all weekend, recommending a switch to the basic 11 design. all the Exper xnce the PDP-11 architecture was carr red out by at Carnegie-Mellon University (HM with CBI . Two of the useful ideas: the UNIBUS, and the use of general registers in a substantrally more fashion general (e.g. as stack came out of earlier work pointers) (CB) at CMU and was described in STRUCTURES COMPUTER (Bell and During the detailed Newell, 1971). design amelioration, 2 persons (HM, responsible for and RC) were the specification. Although the architectural activity Of the II/20 proceeded In parallel with the implementation, there was less interaction than in previous designs where the first DEC and architecture implementation out by were carried the same As a result, person. a slight penalty was paid to build subsequent designs, especially vis a vi5 microprogramming. this point, there were reviews to ameliorate the design, and each suggestion, in effect, amounted to an n+l ; the implementation was proceeding in parallel and (JOI since the logic design was conventional , it was difficult to the tradeoff extensions. Also, design was constrained with boards and ideas held over from the DCM. (The only safe way to design a range is simultaneously do both During high and low end designs.) the summer at DEC, we tried to free increased space, and oP code (nil’edl the UNIBUS bandwidth (with an extra set of address lines), and outlined alternative models. At As the various models began to be outside built the original POP-11/20 nearly all group, architectural control (XC) disappeared, and the architecture by more people, and was managed de5ign resided with no one person! A similar loss of control occurred in the design of the per iphecals after the basic design. The first designs for 16-bit came from a group placed computers PDP-15 management under the marketing person, with engineeri:; background). It was called PDP-X, and did include a range. As a range architecture, it was better thought out than the later PDP-11, but didn’t have the innovative Unfortunately, this group aspects. was intimidating, and some members lacked credibility. The group also managed to convince management that machine was potent ially as the the PDP-10 (which it complex as no one wan ted wasn’t) ; since another large computer disconnected from the main business, it was a sure suicide. The (marketing) management had little understanding of the machine. Since the people involved in the design were apparently simultaneously descgnrng the PDP-X was not of Data General, foremost rmpor tance. As the GCM FDP-X (for pro]ect @esk folded Calculator The advent of large, read-only made possible the various memories, follow-on designs to the ll/ZO. Figure “Models’ sketches the cost of various models versus time, with cons is tent oerformance. lines of design This very clearly shows&the The 11/40 5 tyles (ideologies) . the design was started right after 11/20, al though it was the last to market low and come on the (the high ends had higher priority to they into product ion as get Both the extended the market). 11/04 and 11/45 design groups went through extensrve buy in processes, first as they came into the 11 by alternative designs. In proposrng 11/45, a larger, the case of the 11-like 18-bit machine was proposed by the 15 group: and later, the LINC engineerrng group proposed an alternative design which was subset at the symbolic program compa table level. As the groups constdered and the Machine 142 computer rnterconnectron standard. Al though it has been difficult to fully specrfy the UNIBUS such that one can be certain that a grven system will work electrically and without missed data, specification is the key to the UNTBUS. The bus behavior specification is a yet unsolved problem in dealing with complex1 ty--the best descriptions are based on behavror (i.e., timing diagrams). the software ramificatrons, buy-in Frgure Models shows the was rap&d. mrnrmum cost-orrented group has two lower cost successors providing and the higher performance) (yet have same cost wrth the ability to laroer memories and perform better. thesecame from a Note, both of strategy to the LSI-11. backup read-only These-come from larger increased memor ies, and implement understanding of how to the 11. The 11/7O is, of course, follow on to extend the of the 11/45. 5.0 There are also problems with the deEi9n of the UNIBUS. Al though parity was assigned as two of the bits on the bus (parity and parity is available), it has not been widely used. Memory parity was implemented directly in the memory, since checking required additional time. Memory and UNIBUS parity is a good example of nature of engineering optimization. The tradeoff is one of cost and decreased performance versus decreased service cost and more data integrity for the user: The engineer is usually measured on production cost goals, thus parity transmission and checking are clearly a capability to be omitted from design . ..especially in view of loet performance. The internal Field Service organization has been unable to guantify the increase in service cost savings due to shorter MTTR by better isolation. fault Similarly, many of the transient errors which parity detects can be detected and corrected by software device driver8 and backup procedures without parity. With lower cost for logic and increased r88pOnEibility to include (scope) warranty C08tS a8 part of the product deeign cO8t forces much more checking into the design. a natural performance PMS STRUCTURE give an section, we the evolution of the of its PMS PDP-I1 in terms of structure, and compare it with expectatrons (Bell et al. 1970). the UNIBUS aspects include : The performance: structure; UNIBUS architectural use for diagnostics: required: and control and multi-processor multi-computer computer structures. In this overview 5.1 The UNIBUS - The Center Pm structure Of The the UNIBUS has behaved In general, expectations, acting as a beyond standard for intercommunication of Several hundred types peripherals. of memor les and peripherals have to it. It has been been attached PMS interconnect ion the principle of MD-PC and oeriuherals for media systems in the range- 3K dollars to 1OOK dollars (1975). For larger supplementary buees for sys terns PC-Mp and HP-MS traffic have been added. For very small sys terns, like the LST-11, a narrower bus ((j-bus) has been designed. The interlocked nature of the transfers AS such that there is a deadlock when two compu thr s are joined together using the UNIBUS window. With the window a computer can map another computer’s address space into its own address space in a true mu1 tiprocessor fashion. De8dlock occurs when the two computers simultaneously attempt to accees the other’s addresses through each window. A request to the window is in progress on one UNIBUS , and at the same time a request to the other UNfBUS is in progress on the requestee’s UNIBUS, hence neither can be request answered, causing a deadlock. Cne or both requests are aborted and the deadlock is broken by having the UNIBUS time out since this is eguivalen t to a non-existent address (e.g., a memory). In this the sys tern recovers and way requests can be reissued (which may cause deadlock) . The UNIBUS window is conf rned to appi ica trons where there likely to be a low deadlock’sate. The UNIBIJS by being a standard ha8 provided us with a PMS architecture for easily configuring systems; other organization can also any interface build components which the bus... clearly ideal for buyers. make good Good bU88eS Istandards) neighbors ( in terms of engineering), since people can concentrate delrign in a fasE:on. structured Indeed, the UNIBUS has created a complete secondary industry dealing in alternatrve sources of supply for memorres and peripherals. Outside of IBM the 360 r/o Hultiplexor/Selector bus, the UNIBUS 1s the most widely used 143 5.2 UNIBUS Optimality and Performance 5.3 always more Al though we want performance on one hand, there is pressure to have lower an equal Since cost and peformance cost. are almost totally correlated the two goals perfectly conflict. The UNIBUS has turned out to be optimum over wide dynamic range of product:, (argued below) . However, the lowest site system, the trbus has been introduced, which about l/2 the number of contains and at the conductors: largest systems, the data path width for the processor and memory has been increased to 32-bits for added performance although the UNIBUS is still used for communication with most I/O controllers. Evolution Of Models: Versus Actual Predicted The or iq inal prediction (Bell et al, 1970) was that models with increased performance would evolve using: increased width for path data: multi-processors: and wpar a ted structures for bus control and data transfers to secondary and tertiary memory. Nearly all of these forms have been used, though not exactly as predicted. this points to (Again. lack of architectural overall planning versus our willingness and belief that the suggest ions and plans for the evolution must come from the implementation groups.1 In the earlier 11/45, a separate bus was added for direct access of either bipolar (300ns) or fast MOS (400ns) memory. In general, it was assumed that these memories would be small, and the user would move the important part of his algorithm to the for direct fast memory 11/45 provided 3 execution. The second LJNIHUS direct for transmission of information to the PC fart memory without interference. The rr/rs also increased performance by adding a second autonomous data operation Point unit called the Floating Processor (actually not boti processor) . In this way, integer and floating point computation could proceed concurrently. interconnection schemes Since all are highly constrained, it is clear future lower and higher that systems cannot be accomplished from a single design unless a very low cost, high performance communication media (e.g. optical) is found. The optimaiity of the UNIBUS comes about because memory size (number of address bits) and traffic I/O correlated with the processor are Amdahl’s rule-of-thumb speed. for IBM computers (including the 360) one byte of memory is required instruction/set and one bit of E I/O is required for each executed. For our instruction applications, we believe there is more computation required for each memory word, because of the bias toward control and scientific there has been applications. Also, less use of complex instructions typical of the IBM computers. Hence, we assume one byte of memory required for is each two executed, instructions and assume one byte of I/O is an upper bound real time applications) for (for each instruction executed. In the FDP-11, an average instruction accesses three to five bytes of memory, and with one byte of io, up to six bytes of memory are accessed instruction/set. for each Therefore, a bus which can support two megabytejsec traffic permits instruction execution rates of .33 to 1 5 mega instruction/set. This imputes to meory sizes of .16 to .2s megabytes: the maximum allowable memory is .3 to ,256 megabytes. 6y using a cache memory with a processor, the effective memory processor rate can be increased to further balance the Alternatively, processor. faster floating point operations will or inq the balance to be more like the IBM data, requiring more memory. The 11/70, a cache based processor. is a logical extension of using fast, local memories, but without need for expert movement of data. It has a memory path width of 32-bits, and the control portion I/O transfers and data portion of have been separated as originally suggested. The performance limitation of UNIEIIJS are the removed, since the second Mp system up to permits data transfers of that five megabytes/set (2.5 times that a of the UNIBUS) . Note, peripheral memory map control is needed since Mp address space (two meaabvtes) exceeds the UNIBUS. In this - way, direct memory access devices on the UNIEUS transfer data into a mapped portion of the larger address space. 5.4 Multi-processor Structures Computer Although it is not surprising that multi-processors have not been used specialized except on a highly basis, it is depressing. In Computer Structures (Bell and out 3n Newell, 711 we carried 144 the IBM analysis of 360, multi-processor predicating a The range of performance aeslgn. the PDP-11 models is covered by with the substantially worse than compe t I t Lve al though the 360, environment of the two companies is substantially different. For the smaller models appear to 360, perform worse than the technology would predict. The reasons why mu1 t iprocessors have not materialized may be: 1. i 3. 1 2 3 40 l Planning and technology are Within DEC, not asynchronous. all products are planned and built at a particular time, hence, it is difficult to get the one right time when a multiprocessor would be better than an existing Uniprocessor together with one or two additional new processors. Multiprocessors PRICE/ SYS PEW* er1ce 1 3 3.23 3.47 3.35 PfQP* 1 .58 .Q8 .49 system is 1.47 1.35 .66 -61 .6 Price/ only System,assumrnq l/3 of The most extensive mu1 tiprocessor structure, has been C.mmP, described elsewhere. Hopefully, convincing arguments will be forthcoming about the effectiveness of multiprocessors from this work in order to establish these structures on an applied basis. 6.0 THE TSP Determining an ISP is a design problem. The initial 11 design was based substantially on benchmarks , and as previously indicated this approach yielded a predecessor (not buil tl that though performing best the six benchmarks, was dOlfficu1 t to program for other applications. Incremental market demands specific new machines. require products, a By having more company can better track specific compe t i tor s by unipracessors. Existent PC. PRICE 1 1.23 The second type of structure g iven in Figure MP is a convent ional multiprocessor using multiple port memories. A number of these systems have been installed and operate guite effectively, however, they have only been used for specialized applications. available more new processors than already.. 5. *PC cost * Total 1 1.85 2.4 2.25 multiple srngle From these results we would expect to use up to three processors, to give the performance of a model 40. More processors, while increasing the performance, are less cost-effective. This basic structure has been applied on a production basis in the GT4X series of graphics processors. In this scheme, a second P.display is added to the UNIBUS for display picture maintenance. build a better We can always special processor. single, This design philosophy stems from local optimization of the and designed object, ignores global costs of spares, reliability and training, the of user ability the to adjust dynamically a configuration to his load. are for build PC. PERF HP .6 1.15 1.42 a Pc.cost The market doesn ’ t demand them. Ano the r deadlock : how can the market demand them, since the market doesn ’ t even know that could such a structure exist? not blessed the IBM has yet concept. There designs we can 5.4.1 IPC The basic nature of engineering is to be conservative. this is a classical deadlock situation: learn how to program we cannot until multiprocessors such exist: a system canot systems be built before programs are ready. 4. 6. following results for 11/05 processors sharing UNIBUS: 6.1 - Figure MP gives some of the mu1 t lprocessor sys terns that have been built on the 11 base. The top most structure has been built using 11/05 processors, because of but improper arbitration in the processor, the performance expected based on memory contention didn’t materialize. expect We would the General ISP Design Problems The guiding principles for design in have general, especially difficult because: 1. 145 ISP been The range of machines argues for different encoding over the At the smallest range. byte-or ien ted a systems, approach with small addresses larger is optrmum, whereas Lmplementatlons require more addresses operations. larger and encoding efficiency can be traded off to garn performance. variable, artistrc. to have operations data-type integers) operations The 11 has turned out to be (and hopefully applied effective) over a range of 500 in sys tern price ($500 to $250,000) and memory size (8k bytes to 4 megabytes). The 360 varied over a by comparison range: similar from 4k bytes to 4 megabytes. 2. 3. 4. 5. for data-types Selection totally application. considers words to be - integers, yet doesn ' t have a full set of operations for the byte; nor are the byte and word the ops this same. to BY adhering pc inc iple , the compiler and human code generators are greatly aided. At a style given time, a certain math ine of ISP is used because of the rapidly varying technology. For example, three address machines were initially used to minimize processor the state (at expense of encoding efficiency), and stack machines have never been used extensively due to memory time access and control complexity. In fact, we can observe that machines have over time evolved to include virtually all important operations on useful data-types. We would therefore ask that the elegant, where machine appear elegance is a combined qua1 i ty of instruction formats relating to significance, mnemonic operator/data-type completeness and and orthogonality, addressing consistency. BY general having completely registers) facilities (e.g., and which are not context dependent assists in minimizing instruction the number of and greatly aids in types, use The machine vat ies over time. In the case of DEC, the initial users were sophisticated and could utilize the power at the machine level. language The II provided more fully general registers and was unique in the minicomputer marketplace, which at the time consisted laroely of 1 or 2 accumulator machines with 0 or 1 index registers. the typical Also, m in icompu ter operation codes were small. the 11 extended data-typing to the byte and to reals. by the extension of the auto-indexing mode, the string was conveniently programmed, and the same mechanism provided for stack data-structures. increasing understandability u5efulness). The machine is applied into widely different markets. Initially the 11 was used at the machine language level. The user base broadened by applications with substantially higher level languages. These languages initially were the based scientific reoister transfer languages such FORTRAN, CEC’S BASIC, FOCAL: but the machine eventually began to be applied in the commercral marketplace fo.- the COBOL, RPG , DIBOL. and BASIC-PLUS languages which provided string and decimal data-types. The crlterla In an lnstructlon for and borders on the Ideal goals ace thus a complete set of for a q iven basic (e.g. --completeness, and would be the same varying length --orthogonality. of the data-trues is a function oi‘ the That is, the 11 both bytes and full a capability set IS hlqhly 146 the (and 6. Techniques for generating code the human and compiler vary by widely. more With the 11. addressing modes are provided The a than any other computer. modes for source and destination with dyad ic operators provide what amounts to 64 possible instructions: the Program and by associating Counter and Stack Pointer registers with the modes, even more data accessing methods are provided. For example, 18 MOVE instruction forms of the can be seen (Bell et al, 1971) as the machine is used as a two-address, general registers and stack machine program forms. (The price for this generality is extra bits). In general, the machine has been general used mostly as a register machine. 7. very Basic design can take the be highly general form or and design decisions specific, be bound in some can combination of microcode oc macrocode with no good criteria for tradeoff. Problems Machine Several problems have machine has been basic 1. In Range Extendlnq 6.2 arisen The as systems provide functions get additional segments). the 7.0 extended: extension design did free not leave enough opcode space for extending the machine to increase the data-types. The opera tron-code initial SUMMARY This paper has re-examined the PDP-11 and compared it with the initial goals and constraints. With hindsight, we now clearly see what the problemswith the initial design were. Design faults occurred not through ignorance, but because the design was started too late. As we continue to evolve and improve the PDP-11 over the next five years, it problem--the the 11/45 Was At the t lme was designed (FPP added) , several extension schemes were escape mode to examined : an the floating point add operations: bringing the 11 convent ional more back to a register machine by general reducing the modes and finally, data by adding a the typing mode which could be global switched to seiec t floating point ( Lns tead of byte operations). 2. to Will observe, is use. indeed be interesting however, the ultimate to test HTELIOGRAPHY Ames, G.T., Drongowski, Fuller, S.H. Emulating the PDP-11/40: Proc. COMPCON (19;5,. the addressinq Extend ina VNTBUS limits the range-- the physical memory to 262,144 (la-bits). the bytes the1nll/70, implementation of physical address was th; 4 megabytes by extended to a UNZBUS map so that providing devices in a 262K UNIBIJS space could transfer into the 4 space by mapping megabyte registers. P.J. and the Nova on case study. Bell, G., Cady, R., McFarland, H., Delagi, E., O’Loughlin, J., Noonan, 6. , and Wulf, w. A new architecture of minicomputers-the DEC PDP-11. Proc. SJCC (1970) Vo136, ~~-657-675. Bell, C.G. Computer and Structures. (1971) Bell, J.R. ACM (June 370-372. While limits the physical address are acceptable for both the UNIGUS and larger sys terns, for a single the address program is still confined to an instantaneous space of 16 bits, the user vlc tual address. Threaded 1973) Vol Eckhouse, Sys terns : programming Prentice-Hall, The main method of dealing with relatively small addresses is via process-oriented operating sys terns that handle large numbers of smaller tasks. This a trend in operating is especially for process systems, control and transaction processing. It also enforces a structuring discipline in the organization. (user) program operating The RSX series systems are organized this way, the need for large and addresses except for problems where large arrays are accessed is minimized. Fusfeld, progress Review Newell, McGraw Hill code. No. 6, PP 16, A. CONM R.H. Minicomputer organization and (PDP-11). (1975) A. R. The technological function. Technology (Feb. 1973) FP. 29-38 McWilliams, T., Sherwood, W., Fuller, S., PDP-11 Implementation using the Intel 3000 microprocessor chips. Submitted to NCC (May 1976) O’Loughlin, J.F. Microprogramming a fixed architecture machine. Microprogramming and Sys terns Architecture Infotech State of the Art Report 23. ~~205-224 Ornstein, 1972? (page 28) Stone, H.S. and Siewiorek, D.P. Introduction to computer organization and data structures: PDP-11 Edition. McGraw-Hill, (19751 memory management The initial to extend the virtual proposal predicated on memory was than dynamrc, rather static assignment of memory segment current registers. In the scheme, the memory management are usually address registers considered to be static for a task (al though some operating Turn, R. Computers Columbia University Gulf, W.A., Bell, multi-mini-processor. 147 in the 1980’s. Press 1974. C.G., C.mmp: FJCC (1972) A I BASIC REtC; ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT APPLIED TECHNOLOGY (E.G. SEMICOt0JCTCRS) - IMPLEMENTATION -- I I APPLICATIONS (HARDWARE/ SOFTWARE) - MKT/SALES 4 ARCHITECTURE Competitors Governments, standards,/ testing, professional societies op. -- SYS. LANGUAGES e FlGURE.ORt. flow of information STRUCTURE (specifications, OF ORGANIZATION AFFECTING ideas, etc.) A COMPUTER DESIGN - USEH Fig. DS DESlcll STYLES (IDEOLOGIES) 111 TERIIS OF COST AND PERFORMANCE Performance it / / maximum / / maximum casteffective / / / / / / 1 minimum level of functionalit) f - .------- / incremented fixed 8 variable / costs / / / I / unbuildable 149 / Physical Cons?raints \\ Price A-- Fig. HODELS PDP-I I MODELS PRICE vE9SIJ; T’rlE \llTtI LINES OF COttSTA;IT i’CEt0QtVA’CE PC I PC... I a. MUM-PC strucfure l using a sir& Pdisplry PC I Mp... I l hip... used in CT4X sericr; al~ernr~~wly P spcciahrcd (e.g.. FIT) usq h1p(CO:lS) 3 muttiporl KT... I KMS... PC spcrirlvcd Mp. S encral:crosspom~: Pd ii 0: I5 ;‘I I ;4Oj C’ 16x16 3 E d. C.mmp Cblll rnulri-mini.pr@:cssor Figure bit’ WK... Unibos. I c. hlultiprnccssor ET... I hlul~i~l’roccssor Compwcr SICnibui) slru;wre. Compu~cr S~rw~ures 151 Im~tenren~crj uiln; PDP.t t Ki... ys...
Home
Privacy and Data
Site structure and layout ©2025 Majenko Technologies