Interesting how the e1000 became a gold standard for emulation, though! Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 13, 2016, at 01:35, Anders Magnusson <[email protected]> wrote: > > Den 2016-03-12 kl. 20:50, skrev Paul Koning: >>> On Mar 12, 2016, at 12:25 PM, Anders Magnusson <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Den 2016-03-12 kl. 17:45, skrev Clem Cole: >>>> FYI: CDC and Cray's often used HyperChannel adapters; but I suspect have >>>> long lost the info on it (very funky SW interface). Plus I doubt I still >>>> have the code we developed for it (the HyperChannel was the other side of >>>> the Tektronix TCP/IP for VMS implementation we did in the late 1970's). >>>> My memory is that we dedicated a PP to talking to NOS, so there was very >>>> little OS code. We spliced it into the RJE system and never did much >>>> beyond FTP services for it; when I worked on it. I still talk with the >>>> guy that did the the PP work for NOS (Stan Smith whom I will ask). The >>>> Cray port was done by the NCAR guys working with our CDC and VMS code; but >>>> that was after I was involved in the work. >>>> >>>> BTW: @ LCC we did some work with DG on their UNIX port; I somehow seem to >>>> remember that the Eclipse family used the original AMD ethernet chip set >>>> on their network adapter. >>> DG-UX or MV/UX? >>> The DG ethernet card has a 82586 on board. I have two of those cards, but >>> unfortunately no programming specs. Anyone that has? >> I have a copy of the datasheet -- I can email it if you like (2.4 MB). It's >> the chip used on the DEC Pro series DECNA Ethernet card. It's a truly >> horrible design, with errors that were well known as things to avoid 15 >> years earlier. >> >> In the DECNA, you program it directly -- the card is basically just a bus >> bridge plus a small local memory for the chip to talk to. If the DG boards >> are like that, the 82586 datasheet will serve. But if there's machinery in >> between that exposes a different API, you'd need those specs instead, of >> course. >> >> Also: I've seen a NetBSD driver for it, which may also help understand how >> that chip works. > I am unfortunately too familiar with the 82586 :-/ Never been a fan of the > Intel network chips. > But I assume DG has abstracted the programming interface on this card beyond > recognition, at least based on the number of other chips on the card. > > It seemed to be quite common to add another API to standard chips, the DELUA > for example has a LANCE chip but you do not program the LANCE directly. > > -- Ragge > > _______________________________________________ > Simh mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh _______________________________________________ Simh mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
