Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:17:30 +0200 (CEST) From: Otto Moerbeek <otto@drijf.net> To: Johnny Billquist <bqt@update.uu.se> Cc: John Nemeth <jnemeth@victoria.tc.ca>, misc@openbsd.org, Ted Unangst <ted.unangst@gmail.com>, Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=E1morszky_Bal=E1zs?= <balihb@ogyi.hu>, netbsd-users@NetBSD.org, Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton@gmail.com> Subject: Re: wikipedia article Message-ID: <Pine.BSO.4.64.0606131313300.21035@fonzo.intra.drijf.net> In-Reply-To: <448E8D23.5030008@update.uu.se> References: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNMEBMFEAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> <Pine.BSO.4.64.0606130802280.16242@lou.intra.drijf.net> <448E8D23.5030008@update.uu.se>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006, Johnny Billquist wrote: > Otto Moerbeek wrote: > > On Mon, 12 Jun 2006, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: John Nemeth [mailto:jnemeth@victoria.tc.ca] > > > > Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 1:15 PM > > > > To: Ted Mittelstaedt; Nikolas Britton; Ted Unangst > > > > Cc: Hamorszky Balazs; misc@openbsd.org; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; > > > > netbsd-users@NetBSD.org > > > > Subject: RE: wikipedia article > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 1, 6:11pm, "Ted Mittelstaedt" wrote: > > > > } > > > > } Prior to the release of the 80386 the Intel processors didn't have > > > > } memory protection which was a requirement of any processor running > > > > } the BSD kernel. > > > > > > > > This is not entirely true. The 80286 had memory protection. > > > > However, its memory protection was completely based on segments (i.e. > > > > it could not do paging). > > > > > > Oh, yeah, your right about that. Me bad. > > > > > > > > > > Also, it was only a 16 bit processor. > > > > > > What was the bit size of the CPU's originally used to write UNIX in Bell > > > Labs? > > The PDP-7 was/is an 18-bit machine. > > > What's more, iirc the MMU of the pdp11 isn't what we call a MMU today, > > it could not even do paging. > > You're wrong. You could easily do paging on a PDP-11, if you wanted to. The > main reasons this wasn't done are two. > 1) Each page is 8K. At the time, that was considered way too large pages for a > demand page system. > 2) The address space is only 64 per process, which means you only have 8 > pages. Not only is that perhaps a little little for meaningful paging (most > programs tend to refer to all 8 pages most of the time). The main memory on a > PDP-11 is furthermore 4 meg, so having a lot of processes full memory space in > physical memory at the same time is not a problem. > > The PDP-11 MMU is a beatiful MMU. Nothing like the crap Intel spits out. ;-) I stand corrected. I always thought it coulnd't do paging, but I suppose it should be "due to various restrictions, it couldn't do meaningful paging". -Otto
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSO.4.64.0606131313300.21035>