30 Oct
2010
30 Oct
'10
7:10 a.m.
On 2010-10-30 01:12, ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk (Tony Duell) wrote:
Good point.
Was the PDP-11 the first computer that did not have dedicated I/O
instructions then? Thus relying on memory mapped I/O, instead of just
having it as a potential (as any computer do). Did anyone before the
PDP-11 actually utilize memory mapped I/O before? The fact that lots of
machines do it today (even the x86 I guess) could just be a legacy of
the PDP-11 making it popular?
(Oh, and I'm not counting the IOT instruction on the PDP-11 as an I/O
instruction... :-) )
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
> > >
Just because a CPU architecture has IO instructions doesn't mean you
> > > can't do memory-mapped I/O.
I beleive Steve Ciarcia said in
one of the Circuit Cellar articles in
Byte many year ago that any processor that could access memory could have
memory-mapped I/O. I would add that in the case of a system (rather than
a bare processor),
it helps if there's some spare space in the memroy map:-).
Indeed. :-)
> And
there were other PC displays, that didn't use memory-mapped video
if by
'PC' here you mean something descended from the IBM5150 then I am
curious. All the IBM dipslay adapdaters that I can think of were memory
mapped. Yes, even the PGC had a memory-mapped CGA emulation.