From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, T_DKIM_INVALID autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 5cbc8070 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:00:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 7C7A4A17C3; Fri, 22 Jun 2018 00:00:20 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1EBA9EDE5; Fri, 22 Jun 2018 00:00:10 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=L8fuXDUt; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 802679EDE5; Fri, 22 Jun 2018 00:00:07 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-lj1-f175.google.com (mail-lj1-f175.google.com [209.85.208.175]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7EDF19EC27 for ; Fri, 22 Jun 2018 00:00:06 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-lj1-f175.google.com with SMTP id d1-v6so317595ljc.1 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 07:00:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=h67KKcTE92PeUrfEg2uCnJP9RSA0ig8ht3/5W/4CQMw=; b=L8fuXDUtHi7Zd+Cks4o+uljFMad9WeuTyaWyRCOmjSVS24TqvOY0uDQuMTJeSjxD4l 9RmML45ytQB1+wYk43J8lpUMOZbCnSWHTPdQ3TrCKrNwEsWlp80//Tbo1tHqOBu6Ej7r UtfaC6BiM5bwe3wRk0JFalsVX87xqVvkHfiWL/oxqOcuOqWohXrRlq/osR4K0n1J3S2N s7LhiUQsy7BMA83b+siSFGd6Rin2gtfwN3VU8xlnhOP2uzJ56w12j12unDe9Mp+Hdq4S /W55V1rKWXL7tK1EU7PHt9z515F3PHgYXIksiLexqEg26OPdlGqa90Um28TOuBxAk4+m JXMA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=h67KKcTE92PeUrfEg2uCnJP9RSA0ig8ht3/5W/4CQMw=; b=pJKyeN6GriZISZ30h6NHBMCbGJUpxkhpCuY6I4NBjURnKoaJ7U4VvP3A/PdkkOa/af O2kHRlyyrNoWX4HSFWiv4yVltTujo5d23aiq8//FCPuN7rzoqon8w/kADv2XezYTN58w MrxaB9wkhQ3aosU1yXcXiF7OaWk65SzfYYDvKKZunMVvdJ/Kdd3dSXa0dzU5GhMj7Krz 6lO/7LSTj13vyZGxsbZZXiDq0W0C9wwr68T8A+YVIk+wW9i+oBJibf6MWy48mxicTAnq jXr6sgt6gauplE4kHzbtZk+Exi0xLefT4A7ywud8kOvnpAc46/ogzBJI6upa+IisEqqQ BBqg== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E3mgLoZKbnT0i0LVD9bYNoEmPJDn2fwXGa1vOCNgXrsW/PQ93/K IVUqe9SmjCR0WI5Gy5ayW0H2KSr+5K9VCW+PT6E= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKJXn4VRVSpp+K4QKcGyDda0AaxhuYzoXvUzUh0+EwDU56/pq+ESNirlxHVDg2lVBW0HzppVBY4loyIHtVCalKA= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:905a:: with SMTP id n26-v6mr16813378ljg.33.1529589604755; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 07:00:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a2e:104c:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 07:00:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20180621030505.GA89671@server.rulingia.com> References: <20180619204536.GA91748@server.rulingia.com> <20180620050454.GC91748@server.rulingia.com> <20180620081032.GF28267@eureka.lemis.com> <20180621030505.GA89671@server.rulingia.com> From: Paul Winalski Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 10:00:04 -0400 Message-ID: To: Peter Jeremy Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [TUHS] Old mainframe I/O speed (was: core) X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" On 6/20/18, Peter Jeremy wrote: > > Note that most S360 machines were microcoded with the native ALU size > varying between 8 and 32 bits. The model 25 was also the only S360 with > writable microcode and there was a microcoded APL implementation for it so > it "natively" executed APL. I'm not sure if there were any other novel > microcode sets for it. Yes, the model 25's microcode was in core. I remember we had to reaload it from punch cards at one point when IBM issued an update. I didn't know about the custom APL microcode. I do recall that the disk controller logic, as well as the "selector channel", was in CPU microcode. After the model 25 was withdrawn, IBM released the sources for the microcode to customers. There were several hacks in there to slow down the disk I/O so that it didn't outperform the model 30. > [3] "selector" channels were used for high speed devices - tape, DASD[4] > [4] Direct Access Storage Device - IBM speak for "disk" They used the term DASD because it covered non-disk devices such as drums and the 2321 data cell drive (aka "noodle picker"). -Paul W.