Re: Bug-for-bug compatibility [was RE: SimH DECtape vs. Tops-10 [was RE: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]]]

On 03/02/2018 06:44 AM, Maciej W. Rozycki via cctalk wrote: > On Wed, 28 Feb 2018, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > >> With the VAX, this got cleaned up to a significant extent, and ditto >> with Alpha. In both cases, an internal validator tool was created to >> verify that, at least from the

Re: Bug-for-bug compatibility [was RE: SimH DECtape vs. Tops-10 [was RE: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]]]

On Wed, 28 Feb 2018, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > With the VAX, this got cleaned up to a significant extent, and ditto > with Alpha. In both cases, an internal validator tool was created to > verify that, at least from the point of view of instruction execution, a > new machine worked the

RE: Bug-for-bug compatibility [was RE: SimH DECtape vs. Tops-10 [was RE: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]]]

From: Doug Ingraham Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2018 9:53 AM > This is a great story! And it probably indicates that when developing the > Toad-1 this particular diagnostic was never run from an original DEC generated > tape or the Toad-1 would have failed the diagnostic. Alternatively

Re: Bug-for-bug compatibility [was RE: SimH DECtape vs. Tops-10 [was RE: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]]]

On 02/28/2018 10:55 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > In general, manuals are only a rough approximation of reality. I > remember an old joke that "PDP-11/x is compatible with PDP-11/y if > and only if x == y". And sure enough, if you look at the models > appendix of the PDP-11 Architecture

Re: Bug-for-bug compatibility [was RE: SimH DECtape vs. Tops-10 [was RE: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]]]

> On Feb 28, 2018, at 1:10 PM, David Bridgham via cctalk > wrote: > > >> Imagine our chagrin when days of trying to correct the >> problem led to the conclusion that the diagnostic was incorrect. > > I may have a situation like this in working on my FPGA PDP-10. The

Re: Bug-for-bug compatibility [was RE: SimH DECtape vs. Tops-10 [was RE: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]]]

> Imagine our chagrin when days of trying to correct the > problem led to the conclusion that the diagnostic was incorrect. I may have a situation like this in working on my FPGA PDP-10.  The Processor Reference Manuals seem quite clear that the rotate instructions take E mod 256.  One of the

Re: Bug-for-bug compatibility [was RE: SimH DECtape vs. Tops-10 [was RE: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]]]

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 2:46 PM, Rich Alderson via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > Fast forward 20 years, to Living Computer Museum, where a KI-10 based > DEC-1070 > was undergoing restoration. Diagnostics were needed, so the resident > TOPS-20 > programmer laid hands on the MAINDEC

Bug-for-bug compatibility [was RE: SimH DECtape vs. Tops-10 [was RE: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]]]

From: Paul Koning Sent: Monday, February 26, 2018 12:19 PM >> On Feb 26, 2018, at 12:06 PM, Doug Ingraham via cctalk >> > wrote: >> The purpose of an emulator is to accurately pretend to be the original >> hardware. It doesn't matter that the original OS runs on a

Writing emulators (Was: SimH DECtape vs. Tops-10 [was RE: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]]

The purpose of an emulator is to accurately pretend to be the original hardware. It doesn't matter that the original OS runs on a particular emulator. If a program can be written that runs on the original hardware but fails on the emulator then there is a flaw in that emulator. On Mon, 26 Feb

Re: SimH DECtape vs. Tops-10 [was RE: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]]

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 12:19 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > > Another example is the work pdp2011 had to do in order to make RSTS boot on > that FPGA based PDP-11 emulation, because RSTS was doing some CPU-specific > hackery to test for an obscure CPU (or FPU?) bug

Re: SimH DECtape vs. Tops-10 [was RE: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]]

> On Feb 26, 2018, at 12:06 PM, Doug Ingraham via cctalk > wrote: > > The purpose of an emulator is to accurately pretend to be the original > hardware. It doesn't matter that the original OS runs on a particular > emulator. If a program can be written that runs on

Re: SimH DECtape vs. Tops-10 [was RE: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]]

On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 2:49 PM, Rick Murphy via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > On 2/21/2018 5:14 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > >> Ok, then it could be for VMS, which also does this (via Andy's >> unsupported driver). I don't know of PDP-11 or other minicomputer systems >> that

Re: SimH DECtape vs. Tops-10 [was RE: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]]

On 2/21/2018 5:14 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: Ok, then it could be for VMS, which also does this (via Andy's unsupported driver). I don't know of PDP-11 or other minicomputer systems that do DECtape overlapped seek. I suppose it could be for artistic verisimilitude... TSS/8. It was a

Re: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]

> On Feb 22, 2018, at 3:09 AM, Chris Hanson via cctalk > wrote: > > On Feb 21, 2018, at 11:09 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk > wrote: >> >> That is tricky to cleanly and efficiently implement where each component is >> modeled independently and >>

Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

Guy Sotomayor Jr wrote: > >> On Feb 21, 2018, at 12:19 PM, Rich Alderson via cctalk >> wrote: >> >> From: Guy Sotomayor Jr >> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 11:24 AM >> On Feb 21, 2018, at 10:59 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk

Re: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]

On Feb 21, 2018, at 11:09 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote: > > That is tricky to cleanly and efficiently implement where each component is > modeled independently and > glued together with a higher-level framework. This is why I wonder if multithreaded emulation might be

Re: SimH DECtape vs. Tops-10 [was RE: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]]

Rich Alderson wrote: > It's not for Tops-10. SimH only provides the KS-10 processor[1], so > DECtape is not a possible peripheral. > [1] Although there is a KA-10 in the works. Also KI-10 in its current state. Maybe PDP-6 in the future.

Re: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]

> On Feb 21, 2018, at 3:52 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk > wrote: > >> On 02/21/2018 12:28 PM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote: >> That actually just came up for discussion in a donation review meeting this >> week at >> CHM. >> >> I don't know if they're that interesting w/o

Re: SimH DECtape vs. Tops-10 [was RE: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]]

> On Feb 21, 2018, at 3:25 PM, Rich Alderson via cctalk > wrote: > > From: Paul Koning > Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 6:41 AM > >> And while there is roughly-accurate simulation of DECtape in SIMH (presumably >> for TOPS-10 overlapped seek to work?) > > It's not

Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

> On Feb 21, 2018, at 12:19 PM, Rich Alderson via cctalk > wrote: > > From: Guy Sotomayor Jr > Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 11:24 AM > >>> On Feb 21, 2018, at 10:59 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk >>> wrote: > >>> Typically you'd emulate the

RE: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

Van: Al Kossow via cctalk<mailto:cctalk@classiccmp.org> Verzonden: woensdag 21 februari 2018 20:11 Aan: cctalk@classiccmp.org<mailto:cctalk@classiccmp.org> Onderwerp: Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!) On 2/21/18 10:59 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: &

Re: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]

On 02/21/2018 12:28 PM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote: > That actually just came up for discussion in a donation review meeting this > week at > CHM. > > I don't know if they're that interesting w/o the software and documentation, > and even > then, these things were all locked down with licenses,

Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 11:24 AM, Guy Sotomayor Jr via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > On Feb 21, 2018, at 10:59 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > > > Caching doesn't change user-visible functionality, so I can't imagine > wanting to emulate that.

Re: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 2:11 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: > For what it's worth, I differentiate "cycle correct" from "real time". Agreed. I've been testing Z-80 emulators over the past year because a CP/M game (Scott Adams' Adventures) depends on the R register

SimH DECtape vs. Tops-10 [was RE: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]]

From: Paul Koning Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 6:41 AM > And while there is roughly-accurate simulation of DECtape in SIMH (presumably > for TOPS-10 overlapped seek to work?) It's not for Tops-10. SimH only provides the KS-10 processor[1], so DECtape is not a possible peripheral.

RE: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

From: Guy Sotomayor Jr Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 11:24 AM >> On Feb 21, 2018, at 10:59 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk >> wrote: >> Typically you'd emulate the I/O device functionality, regardless of whether >> that is implemented in gates or in co-processor firmware.

Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

Guy Sotomayor Jr via cctalk writes: >> On Feb 21, 2018, at 10:59 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk >> wrote: >> >> >> Caching doesn't change user-visible functionality, so I can't imagine >> wanting to emulate that. The same goes for certain error handling. >> I've seen an

Re: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 8:52 AM, Ray Arachelian via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > Now, you don't want to run your emulated guest CPU(s) at full speed on > the host machine, because you'll overheat it, and typically, it'll run a > multi-process OS anyway and you don't want to starve the

Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

i dont think there is any physical hardware to test from left sept for maybe part of the front panel and a tape drive sitting in europe in museum and a couple random bit in some private collections drawings theres some but not allot. most of the known documentation is in dutch and from what i

RE: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

Van: Ethan Dicks via cctalk<mailto:cctalk@classiccmp.org> Verzonden: woensdag 21 februari 2018 20:44 Aan: Paul Koning<mailto:paulkon...@comcast.net>; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts<mailto:cctalk@classiccmp.org> Onderwerp: Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF

Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

On 2/21/18 10:59 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > The absence of that emulation isn't a big deal, unless you want to run the > Richy Lary PDP-8 emulator on that emulated 11/60. (Has it been preserved?) > > People have been searching for it for a while now, but it appears to have been

Re: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]

On 2/21/18 11:11 AM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: > Putting it another way, one can maintain a cycle counter in an emulator > whose contents are updated when certain tasks have been accomplished. Synchronization at start of instruction fetch, DMA complete, and firing of an interrupt can hide

RE: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

Van: Paul Koning via cctalk<mailto:cctalk@classiccmp.org> Verzonden: woensdag 21 februari 2018 20:37 Aan: Guy Sotomayor Jr<mailto:g...@shiresoft.com> CC: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts<mailto:cctalk@classiccmp.org> Onderwerp: Re: Writing emulators (wa

Re: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]

That actually just came up for discussion in a donation review meeting this week at CHM. I don't know if they're that interesting w/o the software and documentation, and even then, these things were all locked down with licenses, except for the really early ones like Daisy and Valid. On

Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

> On Feb 21, 2018, at 2:47 PM, Henk Gooijen via cctalk > wrote: > > ... > Tekst on my website: > > The only other PDP-11 that has a WCS option (KUV11, M8018) is the PDP-11/03, > KD11-F processor. > Ritchie Lary wrote the micro-code for the PDP-11/60 to emulate the

Re: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]

On 2/21/18 6:41 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > SIMH in principle allows the writing of cycle-accurate CPU simulators, but I > don't believe anyone has bothered. Atari 2600 requires it. Any simulation of an embedded system that did cycle counting for timing would require it as well. One

Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

opic and Off-Topic > Posts<mailto:cctalk@classiccmp.org> > Onderwerp: Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!) > > > > However, it is my belief (and I think others have also stated) that > > assuming infinitely fast I/O (e.g. no delays what so ever) c

Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

On 02/21/18 13:49, Ray Arachelian via cctalk wrote: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executor_(software) > One more, I point to this because it addresses quite a lot of stuff that's needed to emulate a CPU, though you don't need to implement it this way at all.

Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

On 02/21/18 12:44, Eric Christopherson wrote: > > era, but not all.  see: https://github.com/ctm/executor.git > and > https://github.com/ctm/executor.git > - some of this is called > "High Level >

Re: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]

For what it's worth, I differentiate "cycle correct" from "real time". That is, if you're talking about emulating non-mechanical devices, "cycle correct" emulation should be fairly straightforward, but making it "real time" (i.e. implementing an emulator such that it's indistinguishable by an

Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

> On Feb 21, 2018, at 1:36 PM, Adrian Stoness via cctalk > wrote: > > i dont think there is any physical hardware to test from left sept for > maybe part of the front panel and a tape drive sitting in europe in museum > and a couple random bit in some private

RE: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

:g...@shiresoft.com> > CC: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic > Posts<mailto:cctalk@classiccmp.org> > Onderwerp: Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!) > > > > However, it is my belief (and I think others have also stated) that > > assumin

RE: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

Van: Henk Gooijen via cctalk<mailto:cctalk@classiccmp.org> Verzonden: woensdag 21 februari 2018 21:20 Aan: Pontus Pihlgren<mailto:pon...@update.uu.se>; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts<mailto:cctalk@classiccmp.org> Onderwerp: RE: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF

Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 1:59 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > If microcode is not user-changeable, or if that capability is not a core > feature, then you can easily omit it. That tends to make the job much > easier. For example, I don't know that anyone emulates the

Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

> On Feb 21, 2018, at 2:24 PM, Guy Sotomayor Jr wrote: > > > >> On Feb 21, 2018, at 10:59 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk >> wrote: >> >> >> Caching doesn't change user-visible functionality, so I can't imagine >> wanting to emulate that. The same

Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

> On Feb 21, 2018, at 10:59 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk > wrote: > > > Caching doesn't change user-visible functionality, so I can't imagine wanting > to emulate that. The same goes for certain error handling. I've seen an > emulator that included support for bad

Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

> On Feb 21, 2018, at 11:19 AM, Ray Arachelian via cctalk > wrote: > > On 02/19/18 19:36, Adrian Stoness via cctalk wrote: >> whats invovled in makin an emulator? >> i have a chunk of stuff for the phillips p1000 > > Quite a lot actually. A single CPU system is

Re: Writing emulators (was Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!)

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 10:19 AM, Ray Arachelian via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > On 02/19/18 19:36, Adrian Stoness via cctalk wrote: > > whats invovled in makin an emulator? > > i have a chunk of stuff for the phillips p1000 > > Quite a lot actually. A single CPU system is difficult

Re: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]

On 02/21/18 09:41, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > > SIMH in principle allows the writing of cycle-accurate CPU simulators, but I > don't believe anyone has bothered. It's hard to see why that would be all > that interesting. For some CPUs, the full definition of how long > instructions take

RE: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]

org> > Subject: Re: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!] > > > > > On Feb 20, 2018, at 8:18 PM, Sean Conner via cctalk > <cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > It was thus said that the Great Eric Christopherson via cctalk once stated:

Re: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]

interesting

Re: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]

It was thus said that the Great Eric Christopherson via cctalk once stated: > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 5:30 PM, dwight via cctalk > wrote: > > > In order to connect to the outside world, you need a way to queue event > > based on cycle counts, execution of particular

Re: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 4:01 PM, Eric Christopherson via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 5:30 PM, dwight via cctalk > wrote: > > > In order to connect to the outside world, you need a way to queue event > > based on cycle counts, execution

Re: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]

_ > From: cctalk <cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org> on behalf of Pontus Pihlgren > via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> > Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 11:22:32 AM > To: Adrian Stoness; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > Subject: Writing emulat

Re: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]

From: cctalk <cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org> on behalf of Pontus Pihlgren via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 11:22:32 AM To: Adrian Stoness; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Subject: Writing emulators [Was:

Re: Writing emulators [Was: Re: VCF PNW 2018: Pictures!]

> On Feb 20, 2018, at 2:22 PM, Pontus Pihlgren via cctalk > wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 06:36:13PM -0600, Adrian Stoness via cctalk wrote: >> whats invovled in makin an emulator? >> i have a chunk of stuff for the phillips p1000 > > I would say it depends a lot