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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST,HTML_MESSAGE, 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 c26f6512 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2018 20:59:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 0DD0DA1EF7; Thu, 30 Aug 2018 06:59:56 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6403FA1A64; Thu, 30 Aug 2018 06:59:27 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ccc.com header.i=@ccc.com header.b=aivUJgh4; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 496FBA1A26; Thu, 30 Aug 2018 06:59:22 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-it0-f46.google.com (mail-it0-f46.google.com [209.85.214.46]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A473BA1A22 for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2018 06:59:21 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-it0-f46.google.com with SMTP id 139-v6so9091814itf.0 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2018 13:59:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ccc.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=GivEDO18es37WdiYyRAm7nnU0Z8Zx2F3SimNs68roco=; b=aivUJgh4euyHgYNIKmcBWY+7/ocsd3Nt4PMJ9mC7Sc+khQ21uLAoYNvyeM+x/zSXdz f1MG4tv7nqtt0r+OU3phYms+8Am+2iBErFNCSuZS1xzk7SUHWVXDkjxXG1zahn+Dx42M TaJvfKa1r678vHScWusfi9DwceDUCBRtXTQvw= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=GivEDO18es37WdiYyRAm7nnU0Z8Zx2F3SimNs68roco=; b=QCV5Kc50O44a6FWQK+OnD9qXTQPU4nkTineF2nKJTQgm0QODP7d6ha0dN8J2Fxxp90 FuQ+FyyO567bgqvT9y+csDPZDCssSNX9X4kmS9gbD5A4H04FjZa7kqROIu+e/QgQ2acN Syj7TJ5TFUqr9McfZOqKLMVGlpzBg6QtVg1aUgGmMyGETXcKV8POBRaY/lypQ9jCaN1L 7pepNYVCuej29NGce4lauREXhQfoM6H6pqkhg9cTxx/u+XNHOdgjVSkvS2KHU1yOOuHZ 37a/MmA7hMQXxSZXgPcKf935cyPI1aGxuM9scaKim8ECqZFPHsj0GjV5itgGLl8ksJ6P bx1g== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51ClecnYDYftV8Q3k37RSl1xSk1+y+/ghMJLHkkdU6dEY6cXXrYm +HMeuVivNM5cJo3TQiCCvgBR+Gr+iQnq39oLELwrKsBhd6c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdatH5K+ob8Ak+AQuUERbbD3Mhdqt8IeG+/cZcnMwTxQvzfjYIudmMg8wHrn+nRgpP2xBcj3w2L634oCVAvdhFk= X-Received: by 2002:a24:1196:: with SMTP id 144-v6mr7069005itf.45.1535576360931; Wed, 29 Aug 2018 13:59:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1F62F4D0-7AD1-43C2-A9B7-CF9DF239C3D9@berlan.de> <02ee9a61-2920-40e0-bfa4-feb8b3d38c73@gmail.com> <30f470e7-12cb-00ac-6461-35ce8dfb425d@kilonet.net> <0cfe9e5b-6a34-cea0-3639-4bdfea039cab@kilonet.net> In-Reply-To: <0cfe9e5b-6a34-cea0-3639-4bdfea039cab@kilonet.net> From: Clem Cole Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 16:58:51 -0400 Message-ID: To: Arthur Krewat Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000084f3480574993b8d" Subject: Re: [TUHS] =?utf-8?b?UmV0cm9OZXTigKY=?= 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: TUHS main list Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --00000000000084f3480574993b8d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 4:17 PM Arthur Krewat wrote: > LOL - very true, Clem. That was a shameless bit of self-promotion. From > what I can tell, SIMH does not support a DH11. Yet. > Note I have not tried this .... but from the simh mailing list: * The UNIBUS DH11 and DHU11 had 16 lines per interface * The QBUS DHV11 had 8 lines per interface * The QBUS CXY08 was DHU/DHV compatible and had 8 lines * The QBUS CXA16 " " " " " " " 16 lines *Supposely, the DHV11 works ..... its been on my >>round tuit<< list for a while to verify!!!!* > > But when is an emulated interrupt a bad thing? Except for the idle loop > that may or may not be optimized, the rest is balls-to-the-wall CPU bound > anyway. And these days, even emulated, we're orders of magnitude faster > than the original hardware. > Yeah, but since the 780 was slow on interrupt processing, why stress it any more thsan you have too. > > > http://simh.trailing-edge.narkive.com/Sc9HBFZU/multiple-telnet-ports-in-s= imh-to-rsts-e-9-6 > > I recognize a familiar name in there ;) > Yeah a couple of them ;-) > > But yeah, when a DZ11 was blazing away at 19200 baud (I hacked the TOPS-1= 0 > 6.03A we had at LIRICS to support it), it made the system crawl. > No doubt. CMU and MIT had front ends that put the serial lines on dedicated PDP-11s in front of the 10's - so the Tops (or ITS) only saw canonicalized I/O and it made a huge difference for those systems. By the time Vaxen, I don't think DEC had yet realized what a problem the DZ was. The DH's issue was cost (and space) since it was implemented in MSI TTL and took up a full 'PDP-11 System Unit' on the bus. The DZ11 gave you 8 serial ports in a single PDP-11 slot, which was a huge win. =E1=90=A7 --00000000000084f3480574993b8d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 4:17 PM Arthur Krewat <krewat@kilonet.net> wrote:
=20 =20 =20
LOL - very true, Clem. That was a shameless bit of self-promotion. From what I can tell, SIMH does not support a DH11. Yet.
Note I have not tried this .... but from the simh mailing l= ist:

=C2=A0 * The UNIBUS=C2=A0DH11= =C2=A0and DHU11 had 16 lines per interface
=C2=A0 * The QBUS DHV11 had 8= lines per interface
=C2=A0 * The QBUS CXY08 was DHU/DHV compatible and = had 8 lines
= =C2=A0 * The QBUS CXA16=C2=A0 "=C2=A0 =C2=A0 "=C2=A0 =C2=A0"= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 "=C2=A0 =C2=A0"=C2=A0 =C2=A0 "=C2=A0 =C2=A0&qu= ot;=C2=A0 16 lines

Supposely, the DHV11= works ..... its been on my >>round tuit<< list for a while to = verify!!!!

=C2=A0

But when is an emulated interrupt a bad thing? Except for the idle loop that may or may not be optimized, the rest is balls-to-the-wall CPU bound anyway. And these days, even emulated, we're orders of magnitude faster than the original hardware.
Yeah, but since the 780 was slow on interrupt processing, why stress it= any more thsan you have too.

=C2=A0
Y= eah a couple of them ;-)


=C2=A0

But yeah, when a DZ11 was blazing away at 19200 baud (I hacked the TOPS-10 6.03A we had at LIRICS to support it), it made the system crawl.
No doubt.=C2=A0 =C2=A0CMU and MIT = had front ends that put the serial lines on dedicated PDP-11s in front of t= he 10's - so the Tops (or ITS) only saw canonicalized I/O and it made a= huge difference for those systems.=C2=A0 By the time Vaxen, I don't th= ink DEC had yet realized what a problem the DZ was.=C2=A0 =C2=A0The DH'= s issue was cost (and space) since it was implemented in MSI TTL and took u= p a full 'PDP-11 System Unit' on the bus.=C2=A0 The DZ11 gave you 8= serial ports in a single PDP-11 slot, which was a huge win.
=3D""=E1=90=A7
--00000000000084f3480574993b8d--