From: ggs@shiresoft.com (Guy Sotomayor)
Subject: [pups] Any SMP PDP11 platforms?
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 22:16:13 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1070000173.3354.31.camel@nazgul.shiresoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0311280407380.25678-100000@Tempo.Update.UU.SE>
On Thu, 2003-11-27 at 19:09, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Warren Toomey wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> > I stumbled across this reference to a 1975 Masters thesis:
> >
> > de Brito Meyer. W., and Hawley, J.A.. III. Munix. a multiprocessor version
> > of UNIX. Master's thesis, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, Calif.. 1975.
> > Description of dual processor Unix.
> >
> > Can anybody tell me what PDP11 platforms around 1975 had multi-CPU
> > capability? Also, if anybody has further information about Munix,
> > please let me know!
> >
> > Thanks in advance for any help. I've trawled thru the Unix Archive
> > with no results.
>
> I remember that CMU built a MP system out of 11/40 systems...
> Search for C.mmp (if my memory is correct).
C.MMP was 12 11/40's and 4 11/20's. Each processor had 4KW of local
memory + the 4KW I/O page. The rest of the memory (1.2MW) was
accessible through a "cross-point" switch (ie it wasn't a common memory
bus...think of it as 16 port memory -- there was no memory contention
unless 2 processors wanted to access the same page (4KW) of memory).
In addition to the cross-point switch there was special IPC
(Inter-Processor Communication) hardware to allow the processors to
interrupt and communicate with each other.
The O/S that was run was Hydra a very radical capability based system
(ie everything was represented as a capability -- files, programs, I/O,
etc). If you didn't have a capability for something you didn't even
know it existed. It was very cool!
Somewhere I still have my "Hydra Songbook" which contains a bunch of
details + kernel calls about Hydra.
There was a predecessor (prototype) that supported either 2 or 4
11/40s. I remember seeing it in the same machine room as C. but don't
remember what it being used for at the time as it was "discarded" from
the C. project.
>
> I think they built some special hardware for this. And since these
> machines don't have a cache, it makes life easier...
>
--
TTFN - Guy
prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-11-28 6:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-11-27 22:38 Warren Toomey
2003-11-28 3:09 ` Johnny Billquist
2003-11-28 6:16 ` Guy Sotomayor [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1070000173.3354.31.camel@nazgul.shiresoft.com \
--to=ggs@shiresoft.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).