The reason I choose to use VHDL (or Verilog), both of which really *are*
IEEE standards: future portability and broadness of access across
multiple manufacturer's devices in the future, and compatibility with
logic simulators.
The 1130 is more modern than the machines I am interested in. While
there are still several 1401's our there in the wild I am aware of no
IBM 1410's anywhere, unless IBM has one squirreled away somewhere.
JRJ
On 7/14/2015 11:16 AM, ben wrote:
On 7/14/2015 9:46 AM, Jay Jaeger wrote:
My work has been using structural models, at the
gate level, in VHDL
(Verilog would be fine, too, of course). Individual components (for
example, a piece of an IBM SMS card, or in my existing case, gates made
available to student engineers that were actually individual
gates/chunks of DTL chips) get little behavioral models. As I
mentioned, so far what I have done is reproduce and test a 12 bit
computer designed in an electrical engineering course on logic/computer
design. In August I plan on publishing my experience on a website.
I would note that I also see value in the behavioral approach, which
really would be considerably more detailed than what you get form SimH.
The IBM 1410 cycle-level simulator I have written is closer to what one
might get from a behavioral model, but even that is not quite so
detailed.
Using the structural / gate level techniques, one does run into some
issues, most of which have (or will probably have) solutions:
1) R/S latches composed of gates in a combinatorial loop. The problems
this causes are several, including the latch getting folded into the
look up tables for gates which use the signal, and issues when one
brings such a signal out to an I/O pin to feed to a logic analyzer,
which can cause problems to appear and disappear. My experience is that
one can add a D flip flop after the RS latch. This typically works
because at 50 Mhz, it adds only 20 ns delay, which is comparable to gate
delays these old machines typically had.
2) One-shots. I haven't had to address this one yet, but I am sure
that I will. I expect that one can simply use a counter to handle it -
no big deal at all.
3) Flip flops which are clocked from combinatorial signals. These tend
to cause timing/glitch issues. For example, in one case the
combinatorial output was a zero-check on a counter. Since the counter
flip flops did not all change at exactly the same time, that signal
could glitch during the simulated machines master clock edge. They
respond well to the same general solution as #1 - stick a D flip flop
between the combinatorial output and the clock input. In the case I
mentioned, that gave the signal an entire 50 Mhz clock period to settle
down.
And of course, getting the detailed information one needs to develop
such a model can be a challenge. Fortunately for the older IBM
machines, IBM produced ALDs - Automated Logic Diagrams - which I hope
will generally have enough information.
My experience on FPGA forums during the development of my 12 bit
computer implementation was mixed. I got some helpful comments, but the
majority of folks were not helpful, and instead preferred to bash me for
not redoing the entire machine design using FPGA's the way these
particular folks felt was "the only right way" to use them. Bah.
JRJ
I have felt the right way is NOT to use VHDL or VERLOG sadly. I use
altera and using AHDL is the best for me as it cleanest language so far.
FPGA's have never been standard logic, so why force standards, if you
can not even agree on gates latches and flipflops in fpgas.
Here is the link you have been waiting for, IBM 1130 in FPGA and in the
FLESH.
http://ibm1130.blogspot.ca/
Ben.
PS: Don't use blog format for the web site, they are a pain to read
or search if what you want is more than few years old.