W dniu 2014-12-28 o 14:55, Phil Smith pisze:
Alan Altmark wrote:
Microcode is burned into the CPUs, being the on-chip logic that actually runs
the native instruction set.
Alan, by that definition, none of us have ever applied a microcode patch. Yet I
remember distinctly doing so (box after
In 7536935054212770.wa.alanaltmarkus.ibm@listserv.ua.edu, on
12/29/2014
at 12:09 AM, Alan Altmark alan_altm...@us.ibm.com said:
When we first started using the word microcode I believe it was
correct. Then we split the microcode into a burned-in part and a
loadable part, so the word came
Thanks, Alan-as with so many such things, the real answer is thus It depends!
(where have I heard THAT before?). And it's a multivariable dependency: when,
where, why, how...
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access
In 6469079386912310.wa.alanaltmarkus.ibm@listserv.ua.edu, on
12/29/2014
at 10:44 AM, Alan Altmark alan_altm...@us.ibm.com said:
Yes, lots of articles, and at the end of the day, you still have no
idea how the machine you have is implemented.
Well, we used to, back when customers could
Am 29.12.2014 um 17:44 schrieb Alan Altmark:
But my experience within IBM is that that we love talking about
technology. In fact, we sometime love it a bit too much, particularly
when it's new and it hasn't completed its evolutionary journey.
That's true. I'm in the software business, and for
On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 10:44:20 -0600, Alan Altmark wrote:
Don't get me wrong. A machine that was designed to let you change the
underlying hardware design without altering the programming architecture of
the machine was very smart. And way cool. And a major move forward in the
industry.
Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker
Blog:
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker
From: Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 29/12/2014 17:03
Subject:Re: Slushware
Sent by:IBM Mainframe
In
ofc877ce3b.427af753-on80257dbd.0062c865-80257dbd.0062e...@uk.ibm.com,
on 12/29/2014
at 06:00 PM, Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com said:
I suspect returning to that level of frankness would get you into
machine instruction timings - and all that goes with it. :-)
Those were already
that use them. But we continue
to call it microcode. The joke's on us
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#161 Slushware
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#163 Slushware
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#164 Slushware
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#166 Slushware
79/80
Alan Altmark wrote:
Microcode is burned into the CPUs, being the on-chip logic that actually runs
the native instruction set.
Alan, by that definition, none of us have ever applied a microcode patch. Yet I
remember distinctly doing so (box after box of 1.44MB floppies!). So either IBM
has
In
84bccd71182f0046bcd2fb054fe5237917b2ee2...@hqmailsvr02.voltage.com,
on 12/27/2014
at 09:17 AM, Phil Smith p...@voltage.com said:
This is fun. I'm not sure modern machines are both microcoded AND
millicoded-I thought millicode was just another form of microcode. Am
I wrong?
Yes; millicode
Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2014 10:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Slushware
In
84bccd71182f0046bcd2fb054fe5237917b2ee2...@hqmailsvr02.voltage.com,
on 12/27/2014
at 09:17 AM, Phil Smith p...@voltage.com said:
This is fun. I'm not sure modern machines
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#161 Slushware
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#163 Slushware
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#164 Slushware
as an aside ... the hardware layer from i86 instructions to risc
micro-ops for execution ... isn't serialized ... it is pipelined
On Sun, 28 Dec 2014 05:55:09 -0800, Phil Smith p...@voltage.com wrote:
Alan, by that definition, none of us have ever applied a microcode patch. Yet
I remember distinctly doing so (box after box of 1.44MB floppies!).
So either IBM has changed the meaning of the term, which doesn't quite make
On Fri, 26 Dec 2014 05:55:57 -0600, Shane Ginnane wrote:
I sometimes wonder when was the last time anyone installed to a real piece
of hardware - no {pico,micro,macro)-code.
Slushware is ubiquitous.
The corollary of course is how do vendors like vmware and IBM convince
customers for continue
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
It began nearly a half century ago with microcode implementation of S360
models, and only slightly later, W. M. Waite's Mobile Programming System.
Nowadays:
microcode-millicode-PR/SM-VM-JVM-byte code
How many layers have I neglected? Hercules is a confluent branch
This
000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu (Paul Gilmartin) writes:
It began nearly a half century ago with microcode implementation of S360
models, and only slightly later, W. M. Waite's Mobile Programming System.
Nowadays:
microcode-millicode-PR/SM-VM-JVM-byte code
How many layers
000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu (Paul Gilmartin) writes:
How many layers have I neglected? Hercules is a confluent branch.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#161 Slushware
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#163 Slushware
for other hercules drift ... risc processors
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 09:17:20 -0800, Phil Smith p...@voltage.com wrote:
This is fun. I'm not sure modern machines are both microcoded AND millicoded-I
thought millicode was just another form of microcode. Am I wrong?
Sure. Millicode sits between your program and the machine's native instruction
.
Slushware is ubiquitous.
The corollary of course is how do vendors like vmware and IBM convince
customers for continue to pay for hipervisors ?.
z/OS is not the only golden goose apparently.
Shane ...
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe
20 matches
Mail list logo
