1 May
2008
1 May
'08
4:09 p.m.
I made some more minor corrections; turns out the commands in e00-01
around "4;4" are wrong, those lines are needed or the IOT dispatch
vector ends up in the wrong place.
I suspect, in the end, most of the "hand written" corrections should
ignored.
Right now the svn runs and ends up in the idle loop. It dispatches the
first system call (sys exec). I'm not 100% sure but I think it works.
(still some missing pages but I don't think the code hits them yet)
Not sure why it stops in the idle loop; maybe missing hardware.
I had to add KE11A support to simh; I mostly copied the code from
apout.
I'll put a tar file on my web site with the modified simh source.
-brad
1 May
1 May
5:03 p.m.
I made some more minor corrections; turns out the
commands in e00-01
around "4;4" are wrong, those lines are needed or the IOT dispatch
vector ends up in the wrong place.
I suspect, in the end, most of the "hand written" corrections should
ignored.
I'm suspecting the opposite.. I went through all of the comments in
notes.txt about hand written corrections and read through the code to
see if they make sense or not and it seems like all of the corrections
did make sense in the code and the original code that they replaced
did not. I updated the code to reflect this and added comments to
the notes file.
btw, there are still a bunch of unresolved symbols in the low address
vector tables.. I took a look at the assembly memory dump last night
(and also committed code in tools to convert the a.out to a bunch
of simh deposit commands).
I had to add KE11A support to simh; I mostly copied
the code from
apout.
This discussion of hardware is making me wonder -- does this nail down
the hardware? The 1ed manuals mention tht they ran on a 24kbyte
pdp 11/20, but that they were eying an 11/45. My reading of the code
was making me lean towards the original 11/20 configuration, but it
sounds like some of these features might be present in the 11/40 or
11/45?
I'll put a tar file on my web site with the
modified simh source.
speaking of modifying simh, we may have to map one of the similar
serial devices in at the dc11 address to support ttys. simh doesn't
support the DC-11, but when I asked on the simh mailing list someone
mentioned that one of the existing devices is very similar with
less support for modem control lines.
-brad
Tim Newsham
http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/
5:10 p.m.
Tim Newsham wrote:
This discussion of hardware is making me wonder --
does this nail down
the hardware? The 1ed manuals mention tht they ran on a 24kbyte
pdp 11/20, but that they were eying an 11/45. My reading of the code
was making me lean towards the original 11/20 configuration, but it
sounds like some of these features might be present in the 11/40 or
11/45?
Use of EAE is HIGHLY unlikely on anything after the 11/20.
There was a better solution (EIS) for the 11/40 and forward.
The note for the Jan 73 talk mentions they were still working on writing
the 11/45 version, which puts the release well after the code you're working
with.
Still looking for EAE docs. May have to scan an 11/20 handbook to get it.
5:19 p.m.
Tim Newsham wrote:
Ok, I may well be confused.
Before I took the comments the IOT vector was zero. After I removed
them the IOT vector (34) was correct.
Perhaps the code wants to be loaded at 014 instead of 0.
I put the comments back in - I'll try changing where I load.
I sure looks like they used an 11/20 with a KE11A board.
I made some
more minor corrections; turns out the commands in e00-01
around "4;4" are wrong, those lines are needed or the IOT dispatch
vector ends up in the wrong place.
I suspect, in the end, most of the "hand written" corrections should
ignored.
I'm suspecting the opposite.. I went through all of the comments in
notes.txt about hand written corrections and read through the code to
see if they make sense or not and it seems like all of the corrections
did make sense in the code and the original code that they replaced
did not. I updated the code to reflect this and added comments to
the notes file. btw, there are still a bunch of unresolved symbols in
the low address
vector tables..
I thought only fpsym was undefined in those vectors.
I had to add
KE11A support to simh; I mostly copied the code from
apout.
This discussion of hardware is making me wonder -- does this nail down
the hardware? The 1ed manuals mention tht they ran on a 24kbyte
pdp 11/20, but that they were eying an 11/45. My reading of the code
was making me lean towards the original 11/20 configuration, but it
sounds like some of these features might be present in the 11/40 or
11/45? speaking of modifying simh, we may have to map one of
the similar
serial devices in at the dc11 address to support ttys. simh doesn't
support the DC-11, but when I asked on the simh mailing list someone
mentioned that one of the existing devices is very similar with
less support for modem control lines.
I can do that. Are there docs on the DC-11?
-brad
5:10 p.m.
I made some more minor corrections; turns out the
commands in e00-01
around "4;4" are wrong, those lines are needed or the IOT dispatch
vector ends up in the wrong place.
Hmm.. those "/" comment characters are definitely not hand written
in. There are hand written comments that state what address things
should land at. I'm a bit confused how this could happen with
those comment characters in place, though, so removing them does
sound like its the right thing to do. By the way, you removed the
leading comment characters but did not add comment characters
after the entry but before the text comments that follow them.
ie: "4;4 init by copy" should be "4;4 / init by copy".
-brad
Tim Newsham
http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/
5:22 p.m.
Tim Newsham wrote:
now you've convinced me it's not :-)
I wonder... hmmm. if the V1 a.out header where 12 bytes long, then
everything would just automagically work.
The v7 a.out header is 16 bytes long; but could the v1 a.out header
have been 12 bytes long?
-brad
I made some
more minor corrections; turns out the commands in e00-01
around "4;4" are wrong, those lines are needed or the IOT dispatch
vector ends up in the wrong place.
Hmm.. those "/" comment characters are definitely not hand written
in. There are hand written comments that state what address things
should land at. I'm a bit confused how this could happen with
those comment characters in place, though, so removing them does
sound like its the right thing to do.
5837
days inactive
5837
days old
5 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Al Kossow -
Brad Parker -
Tim Newsham