12 Feb
2000
12 Feb
'00
2:05 a.m.
Due to the instruction set incompatibilities between
the 11/20 and other
11s, will they even run RT11 V30B with 8K core?
RT11 V03B ought to be OK, as long as you have enough memory. I know that
12K words core is enough (I have V03B on an 11/04 with 12K core), I suspect
it will fit in 10 or 8K.
If you try to run RT-11 5.5 or 5.6 on an 11/20, you'll get some complaint
because EIS instructions found their way into a few utilities and drivers.
This has been rectified for 5.7; see the 5.7 release notes for details.
--
Tim Shoppa Email: shoppa(a)trailing-edge.com
Trailing Edge Technology WWW: http://www.trailing-edge.com/
7328 Bradley Blvd Voice: 301-767-5917
Bethesda, MD, USA 20817 Fax: 301-767-5927
12 Feb
12 Feb
10:53 a.m.
CLASSICCMP(a)trailing-edge.com wrote:
Due to the
instruction set incompatibilities between the 11/20 and other
11s, will they even run RT11 V30B with 8K core?
RT11 V03B ought to be OK, as long
as you have enough memory. I know that
12K words core is enough (I have V03B on an 11/04 with 12K core), I suspect
it will fit in 10 or 8K. 
12:40 p.m.
On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 07:53:27PM -0500, Jerome Fine wrote:
I see that V3.0 distribution of RT-11 has a MAC8K.SAV
file. Does this
mean that the total memory, including the RT-11 Operating System, can
run in 8 KBytes with MAC8K running in somewhat less? OR, does
MAC8K.SAV require 8 KBytes just to run itself (000000 to 017776)
with RT-11 being located above 020000 (octal)?
I believe it means 8 K for the whole system, but it's 8 K *words* not 8
K bytes. But I can't find anything in the MACRO V4.0 (which had an 8 K
flavor too) manual that says for sure, all they do is show which features
are missing in MAC8K.
John Wilson
D Bit
12:20 p.m.
Also, I looked at the SYSMAC.SML file and note that
there is no .DrVTB
macro present (also no .DrSet macro although the information is hard
coded into the various device drivers, and obviously the SET commands do
work). Does this mean, in your opinion (maybe you or someone else
remembers that far back - 22 years ago) that an LS.MAC device driver
can't operate in V3.0B since RT-11 is not yet smart enough to use dual
CSR/VECTOR hardware that requires two .DrAst entries? I notice that V4.0
of RT-11 finally has the LS.SYS device driver, but there is none present
in V3.0B of RT-11, only the LP.SYS device driver.
The .DRxxx set of macros were not added to RT until about the V4.0
timeframe. If you were to take an LS.MAC from a later release and
modify it in such a way that it did not use .DRxxx macros, and used
what data structures were available in V3B, it certainly would work.
Megan Gentry
Former RT-11 Developer
+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
| Megan Gentry, EMT/B, PP-ASEL | Internet (work): gentry!zk3.dec.com |
| Unix Support Engineering Group | (home): mbg!world.std.com |
| Compaq Computer Corporation | addresses need '@' in place of '!' |
| 110 Spitbrook Rd. ZK03-2/T43 | URL: http://world.std.com/~mbg/ |
| Nashua, NH 03062 | "pdp-11 programmer - some assembler |
| (603) 884 1055 | required." - mbg |
+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
13 Feb
13 Feb
2:10 a.m.
Megan wrote:
Also, I looked
at the SYSMAC.SML file and note that there is no .DrVTB
macro present (also no .DrSet macro although the information is hard
coded into the various device drivers, and obviously the SET commands do
work). Does this mean, in your opinion (maybe you or someone else
remembers that far back - 22 years ago) that an LS.MAC device driver
can't operate in V3.0B since RT-11 is not yet smart enough to use dual
CSR/VECTOR hardware that requires two .DrAst entries? I notice that V4.0
of RT-11 finally has the LS.SYS device driver, but there is none present
in V3.0B of RT-11, only the LP.SYS device driver.
The .DRxxx set of macros were not
added to RT until about the V4.0
timeframe. If you were to take an LS.MAC from a later release and
modify it in such a way that it did not use .DRxxx macros, and used
what data structures were available in V3B, it certainly would work. From what I can understand, that means that the
essential macros were
already available. While .DrSet would have been helpful, I
can see in
block zero of LPX.SYS that there is a full set (pardon the pun) of SET
options and the LP.MAC file just has them hard coded in place.
The key question I am wondering about is IF the ISR interaction between
the operating system and the device driver that is present in V4.0 of
RT-11 when the LSX.SYS device driver is LOADed and both pair
of CSR/VECTOR are activated (so that XON/XOFF can be allowed
for a serial printer) is also present in V3.0 of RT-11? I do not want to
assume that just because V4.0 allowed two CSR/VECTOR pairs to
be active and a device driver such as LSX.SYS to have two .DrAst
entry points that V3.0 of RT-11 also allows the same thing.
Sincerely yours,
Jerome Fine
3:07 a.m.
Jerome Fine replies:
I do not wish to contradict you, but I did "EDIT" the V3.0 SYSMAC.SML
file and found: .DrBeg .DrAst .DrFin .DrEnd
From what I can understand, that means that the essential macros were
already available. While .DrSet would have been helpful, I can see in
block zero of LPX.SYS that there is a full set (pardon the pun) of SET
options and the LP.MAC file just has them hard coded in place.
I'm sorry, I forgot about the macros you mention -- those were there from
the start (at least once the handler/monitor separation occurred), but the
additional ones as you mention were not added until a later release...
Until then, things like the SET tables were hard-coded into the module.
The key question I am wondering about is IF the ISR
interaction between
the operating system and the device driver that is present in V4.0 of
RT-11 when the LSX.SYS device driver is LOADed and both pair
of CSR/VECTOR are activated (so that XON/XOFF can be allowed
for a serial printer) is also present in V3.0 of RT-11? I do not want to
assume that just because V4.0 allowed two CSR/VECTOR pairs to
be active and a device driver such as LSX.SYS to have two .DrAst
entry points that V3.0 of RT-11 also allows the same thing.
I don't think dual vector support is in V3,0 of RT. I'm not absolutely
sure, but I can't think of any handlers which used that. I'm sure it
would be possible to do using the handler install code, but I also don't
remember for which version that support was added.
Then again, I do remember a KB handler making the rounds way back when...
it must have used two vectors, but I don't know how it did it.
Megan Gentry
Former RT-11 Developer
+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
| Megan Gentry, EMT/B, PP-ASEL | Internet (work): gentry!zk3.dec.com |
| Unix Support Engineering Group | (home): mbg!world.std.com |
| Compaq Computer Corporation | addresses need '@' in place of '!' |
| 110 Spitbrook Rd. ZK03-2/T43 | URL: http://world.std.com/~mbg/ |
| Nashua, NH 03062 | "pdp-11 programmer - some assembler |
| (603) 884 1055 | required." - mbg |
+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
9080
days inactive
9081
days old
5 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.com -
jhfine＠idirect.com -
mbg＠world.std.com -
wilson＠dbit.dbit.com