[email protected] (John McKown) writes:
> ​Yes. I remember some decades back reading that CISC was going to die due
> to RISC performing better with optimizing compilers​. That both did and
> didn't come true. The hardware exposed ISA is dominated by CISC on the high
> end (RISC ISA chips that I know of are ARM, Sparc, and MIPS) but the
> hardware internally is more like RISC. Conceptually, a bit like what IBM
> did with the TIMI for the i systems. Except that TIMI, from what I've read,
> is actually compiled into native code on the first execution and is store
> in a "hidden" portion of the executable on disk. Said compiled code is
> "foot printed" and recompiled if the TIMI object is change or, sometimes,
> when maintenance is applied to the i system software. I found the concept
> fascinating.

re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015.html#44 z13 "new"(?) characteristics from 
RedBook

low&mid range 360/370s were vertical microcode with standard cisc
engines. in the late 70s an effort was started to move the large number
of internal microprocessors to 801/risc (mostly 801/risc "Iliad" chips)
... including all of the 370 native engines (4361/4381 followon to
4331/4341), the as/400 (aka i-system,) and numerous controllers. For
various reasons all of these efforts faultered (and you found various
801/risc engineers leaving and going to other vendors, spawning their
risc projects) and reverting to business-as-usual cisc. A decade after
as/400 ships with cisc, it (finally) migrated to (risc/801)
power/pc. some past posts mention 801/risc, iliad, romp, rios, fort
knox, power, power/pc, etc
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#801

one of the earliest such efforts was the AMD 29K (and IBM may have sued
AMD because former 801/risc engineer worked on it).  Some (former)
IBMers showed up working on HP "snake" risc ... and later Itanium.

801/risc as the native engine for microcoded 370 ... including some work
on just-in-time (JIT) "compiling" ... sequences of 370 code segments
dynamically translated to native risc (instead of repeated straight
interpretation). Equivalent JIT was later done for some of the i86-based
370 simulators ... and analogous JIT is being done for JAVA.

other trivia, AIM/Somerset (applie, ibm, motorola) for single chip
801/risc (aka power/pc) somewhat combined 801/risc rios with Motorola's
88k risc (internal IBM 801/risc had long history of not supporting cache
consistency making multiprocessor implementations difficult, Motorolo's
88k did have cache consistency support).

The pentium-pro translate from i86 to risc could be considered similar
to (long history of) 360/370 microcoded implementations ... but at the
hardware layer and pipelined. The 360/370 microcode implementations
typically avg. 10 native instructions for every 360/370 instruction and
since they were serialized, it needed a 10mip processor to get 1mip
360/370. The pentium-pro pipelined just needed 1mip native since it was
doing several things, concurrently, in parallel with the pipeline.

-- 
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to