hello

On Fri, 27 Aug 1999, Matt Thomas wrote:
> Unless you can get pry AXE (the VAX validation tool) out of Compaq, it 
> might be difficult to prove that it really is a VAX.  There are a whole 
> lot of really obscure conditions that any implementation has to handle.

 yeah, seriously!!! does anybody have any connections in DECompaq that 
might look into something like this?? 


> 
> Think of doing a CALLS over a page boundary which really crosses a 
> 128 page boundary and the page of that page's PTE is not valid (paged out).
> 


according to VARM, a translation-not-valid fault should result from this. 
The address of the call would be preserved in the memory manangement fault 
stack. 


> If I was doing this, I'd use an existing Pentium socket (such as socket 7 
> or 370).  No support chips to design.  Relatively known problem.  But
> will sacrifice some on performance.

 but then were building a PeeCee with a VAX processor, thats gross!
i want to take advantage of the power and beauty of the VAX architecture!

> The VAX 9000 already got around it since it used extended PTEs.  Anything
> we do should use the same design.

 there are compatibility issues there... it'd be tough to get good ol' 
BErkeley UNIX to run on these, for example! the machine is more like an 
Alpha with a VAX processor than a VAX. still, im not too against this 
idea. 
Especially if we support a means to doing it the old way so that old 
software can work without knowing the difference.. ?? 

> Do you want to boot VAX/VMS on it?  Will you write the SYSLOA for the machine?

i'm not VMS guru, but i think it would only be fitting of a VAX 
compatible ot be able to run VMS. I'm pretty much strictly a UNIX type.