From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id c1ab0a7b for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 06:53:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 68A2993D3C; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 16:53:39 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6761793D45; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 16:53:05 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 50C3993D2D; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 16:53:02 +1000 (AEST) X-Greylist: delayed 511 seconds by postgrey-1.36 at minnie.tuhs.org; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 16:53:01 AEST Received: from rooster.satexas.com (rooster.satexas.com [207.235.90.2]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AEAAE93D1B for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 16:53:01 +1000 (AEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rooster.satexas.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0A841C2A87; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 00:44:29 -0600 (CST) Received: from rooster.satexas.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rooster.satexas.com [127.0.0.1]) (maiad, port 10024) with ESMTP id 50071-09; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 00:44:28 -0600 (CST) Received: from nat100.technologists.com (rrcs-71-42-153-195.sw.biz.rr.com [71.42.153.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: csauer@nwhillsumc.org) by rooster.satexas.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AC2BF1C2A82; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 00:44:28 -0600 (CST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\)) From: Charles H. Sauer In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 00:44:27 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <899AF90D-22DB-431F-929A-8BD3F144F610@technologists.com> References: <25E62EB5E090E7CB.c5cb28db-f209-4d75-8ad6-a165cb810b47@mail.outlook.com> To: Kevin Bowling X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.60.0.2.5) X-Virus-Scanned: World Net ProMail v2.0.0 Subject: [TUHS] anedotes: RT/PC VRM, (early) AIX compilers, IBM (Research) software release/pricing [was Re: Bitsavers' RT/PC, AIX, AOS, etc. recent additions X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: TUHS Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" > On Feb 18, 2020, at 7:41 AM, Kevin Bowling = wrote: >=20 > ... >=20 > IBM abandoned the idea of any ukernel with AIX3 for RISC/6000.. = Charlie may be able to add commentary on that but it was almost = certainly for performance which was paramount in the workstation wars = and RS6K had an front runner opening. >=20 I initially missed Kevin's ping after my spam filter put several TUHS = messages in /var/mail/devnull. (I eventually skim subject lines of = messages that go there.) I could write more than I want to/should about how the VRM came to be = and not to be, but will try to add a little to what I've said before = (https://notes.technologists.com/notes/2017/03/08/lets-start-at-the-very-b= eginning-801-romp-rtpc-aix-versions/). I'm trusting 30+ year-old = memories here and not looking at the various papers and manuals that = might inform. I joined Glenn's AFWS project July 5, 1982. There was no well defined = software plan yet. Glenn wanted to do something useful and significant, = and proposed that we do the VRM. We had several distinct user = environments in mind. I took the lead in writing a specification of the = VMI (virtual machine interface) while others started prototyping. We = were way overly ambitious with abstractions along the lines of the = single level store of (Glenn's) System 38, trying to take advantage of = the 40 bit addressing of the Rosetta virtual memory chip, yet still = heavily influenced by CP/CMS. After a few months, Al Chang, primary = person behind CP.R, came to Austin for a design review of what we'd = done. He told Glenn he'd grade our work "C+". That might have been = generous.=20 We scaled back our ambitions dramatically, started working with ISC. = About the time (1983) of the transition from "ad tech" to "product" = organization, it became clear that our virtual memory manager needed to = be scrapped and we lifted what Al had done for CP.R and put it in the = VRM. In hindsight, the VRM turned out better than it might have. Besides AIX = there was a version of Pick for VRM that sold about 4000 copies = according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_RT_PC. Though the VMI = cost us some in performance, we were surprisingly successful in = minimizing the penalties. But with AIX 3 and RS/6000 we wanted to take = dramatic steps forward, and it made no sense to preserve the VMI. Anecdotal comments on other TUHS/COFF discussions: If I recall correctly, pcc, eventually including the HCR optimizing = phase, was bundled with base AIX. Initially, the C compiler based on the = PL.8 compiler would only run on CMS, so it was not generally available = outside of IBM, but app vendors, especially CAD vendors, were enabled = and encouraged to come to Austin to use it to get the best performance. = The native C compiler based on PL.8 compiler concepts ended up being a = complete rewrite, outside of Yorktown, and sold as a separate product. Producing software products, getting them released, priced, etc. was = very confusing to me most of the time I was at IBM. Part of it was the = history that Clem has cited. Part of it was confusion about the = antitrust suits against IBM. Part of it was confusion about whether and = what software was patentable. Academics and others wanted access to the = modeling & simulation software, RESQ, my team developed at Yorktown. = Eventually, the concept of "Research Distributed Program" was agreed = upon and RESQ was the first instance: = https://technologists.com/sauer/RA144.pdf. However, we were forced to = price RESQ much higher than I thought reasonable. I had already = transferred to Austin by the time the release was official -- I don't = know how many copies were sold. But source code was necessary to take = full advantage of RESQ so the PL/I source was included on the tapes. When OSF was announced, with the intention of making AIX source = available to the other OSF companies, I was stunned because it was so = uncharacteristic of the IBM I thought I knew. It would be interesting to = know how that would have worked out if OSF had stuck with AIX and IBM = had delivered the source on the schedule everyone hoped for, but that's = on a different timeline than this one.=20 -- voice: +1.512.784.7526 e-mail: sauer@technologists.com =20= fax: +1.512.346.5240 web: https://technologists.com/sauer/ Facebook/Google/Skype/Twitter: CharlesHSauer