[TUHS] Unix & Memory Management Units (MMU)
schily at schily.net
Thu Dec 8 20:39:50 AEST 2016
Earl Baugh <earl.baugh at gmail.com> wrote:
> I can at least shed some light on at least when the Sun boxes supported it
> (which may or may not help narrow down the date)
> The initial Sun 1/100 multibus machines did not support virtual memory. I
> have one of the last (if not the last) original multibus boards
> from Sun with the original PROMs... and it was supported up to Sun OS 0.7.
> This OS was based off UniSoft UNIX v7. The 0.7 version was released
> in 1982.
> In order to support virtual memory systems, there was a board upgrade
> required. Anyone who wanted to go to SunOS 1.0 had to get this board
> upgrade (which from what I know, was a board swap... not sure if money
> traded hands as well... and is one core reason the original boards are
> rare). The release of Sun OS 1.0 was in November 1983.
The oldest Sun I had was a multibus machine with a mc68010.....This was in
January 1985. These machines still had a keyboard that was connected to the
frame buffer to play with the row/col readout lines. See:
/usr/include/sys/kbd.h:#define KB_KLUNK 0x00 /* Micro Switch 103SD32-2 */
which is still in the recent sources ;-)
The problem you describe is not related to virtual memory, but to demanded page
loading as an enhancement to the old swapping method. This demanded page
loading did not work at all with the 68000 and even the Bourne Shell triggered
a bug from this deficit - see below.
BTW: The name of the OS was not SunOS these days. AFAIR, the first time it was
called "SunOS" was christmas 1985 (the 0-series of first boards with mc68020
have been built December 24 1985) and the OS was called SunOS-3.0. I never
understood how Sun managed to get these boards delivered through the customs
to Berlin in December 27 or 30. At that time, I was working for the first
large Sun customer H.Berthold AG and we received these boards.
Before SunOS-3.0, it was called similar to "BSD-4.2 UNIX Sun version foo".
I am not sure what you mean with this NULL ptr dereferences. AFAIR, on SunOS I
never could dereference a NULL pointer but in SVr3 nearly all commands used an
option parser that caused a NULL pointer dereference. On SunOS they dumped
core if you tried to compile and run then.
The printf() on SunOS however printed "(null)" for printf("%s", NULL);
SVr4 used a SunOS kernel and thus did not allow to dereference NULL pointers.
The user space commands have been from SVr3 and _most_ of them had been fixed
to avoid NULL pointer dereferences.
Today, Solaris comes with a libragy 0 at 0 that maps a page of nulls to address 0.
Call "LD_PRELOAD=0@= command" in case you have one of these nasty programs
developed on Linux that use to dump core on Solaris ;-)
Back to the Bourne Shell:
The original Bourne Shell did not use malloc, but rather had a SIGSEGV handler
that used to extend the "string stack" called "stak" via sbrk() whenever the
code tried to access data beyond the end ot the heap.
This method was great, but did not work with the mc68000, as the 68000 had a
conceptional bug in the micro code. It could not restart code like:
*to++ = *from++;
correctly after the return from an exception handler trap.
What Sun did at that time was to add tests to the code to avoid that SIGSEGV
hits. This code is still in recent Bourne Shell versions.
I did however discover a missed place in the code last year while running a
fuzzer on the code. Note that the "stak" module has been replaced 2012 with
code based on a rewrite from Geoff Collyer. See:
EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/
More information about the TUHS