On 18/04/2013 21:28, Cory Smelosky wrote:
On 18 Apr 2013, at 13:17, "Dave McGuire" <mcguire at neurotica.com>
wrote:
On 04/18/2013 01:14 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote:
Yeah. Every time I think of IBM mainframe
designs...I can't help but wonder
why microchannel for the microcomputer market never took off.
I'm not sure
it's fair to say that it never took off. It was very popular
for a long time. Many manufacturers made MCA cards. It was also big in the
RS/6000 world.
How many people outside of IBM cloned it though? It definitely
didn't survive as long as PCI.
However...that has nothing at all to do with
mainframes. Some of the
"baby" development system "mainframes" like the P/390 do use
MCA...there's an
MCA version of the P/390 card. (that was the first one, the next two were PCI)
I
thought the architecture was derived from some of the designs IBM implemented for the
busses in their mainframes?
I think that was more "Marketing" than anything real. All S/360 i/o is
via what is called a "Channel" which is physically implemented as a BUS.
However its not directly connected to memory like an ISA or MCA card.
Instead the channel has a dedicated programmable interface usually just
refered to as a "Channel" but its a really an intelligent
controller/cpu which runs something called "channel programs". Its a
fairly simple program but it will do scatter/gather i/o, loop, test
device status etc. so offloading much of the work in doing i/o away from
the main CPU. All a program had to do to perform i/o was construct a
channel program that defined what i/o it wanted doing and issue a Sart
IO (SIO) command and the channel program does the rest. So for a
communications line you can leave a channel program running in an
endless loop and it will only interupt when a byte arrives...
So whilst MCA had DMA it only had one DMA path to memory and there was
no equivalent of a "Channel Program" even though it was called "Micro
Channel Architecure"....
If I remember properly he S/360 architecture allowed for 8 channels
running at 1.5 MBytes/Sec (so 12Mbits), S/370 upped this to 4Mbytes/sec
or 32Mbits/sec and allowed more channels. In XA there can be 256
channels... but they are no longer real channels...
Each channel has 256 addresses, 00 thru FF. Typically we add the channel
number to the start so a S/360 could address up to 2048 (8x256) 000 thru
7FF devices. As logic was expensive typically devices were connected by
a controller. Only the controller actually connects directly to the
channel via a standard interface called Bus+Tag. The devices connect to
the controller, but via some interconnect appropriate to the device. So
Tapes and Disks had similar cables to the Bus+Tag, but screens connected
via the 93ohm co-ax which is where we started.
The original plan was that these were set up as 16 controllers each with
up to 16 devices but later on devices such as printers appeared with
built controllers and controllers that could support more than 16
devices became common so tweaks were made.
There are pictures of the Bus+Tag connectors that connected the cables
used to connect a channels controllers here:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_System/360
MCA was
really a microcomputers-only bus.
True.
>> That interface board allows one to connect a
PeeCee (or a Mac, or whatever
>> it's for) to one of those establishment controllers.
> I want to know more about these boards now, did software come with them?
Like other application-specific boards, they usually came with a driver
disk and likely a 3270-ish terminal program.
I wonder how they handled the
extended keyboard buttons. Did they include a
keyboard? ;)
Yes, there was a special keyboard.
I figured there would have
been.
Speaking of keyboards?it seems like one of the ones you gave me has failed! Seems to be
an issue with its little electronics.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA