Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch > #3360

Re: 'smttter IBMdroids

Show all headers | View raw

Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> writes:
> IBM didn't call it SMP, but multi-processor systems date back to the
> S/360, although they were somewhat special order then.  The S/370 line
> included a couple of machines (370/158, 370/168, IIRC), which had what
> IBM called Attached Processor ("AP") and Multiprocessor ("MP")
> configurations.  These were SMP in every sense of the word, the main
> difference was that an AP machines could not do I/O from the second
> CPU (IOW, they couldn't issue any of the half dozen I/O instructions,
> or take I/O interrupts), whereas the MP machines could.
>
> Starting with the 3080 series, IBM supported four processors.  IBM
> called the two CPU 3081s "dyadic", and had some other term (which
> escapes me at the moment) for the four CPU 3084, but the 3084 could be
> physically partitioned into two 3081 equivalents.
>
> Parallel Sysplex is a much later term, and refers to the IBM
> clustering technology for zOS.

re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011k.html#82 'smttter IBMdroids

all 370 multiprocessors were two processor (except for a special 5-way
and a 16-way that i got to work on ... but were never announced or
shipped) and like 360/65 simulated shared i/o with processor dedicated
i/o channels ... and twin-tailed controller ... with two channel
interfaces, one for each processor dedicated channels.

all 360 & 370 two processor multiprocessors were partionable into
two independent single processor configurations.

when 3081 (two processor smp) was initially introduced, it was referred
to as dyadic to differentiate from 360&370 multiprocessors ... because
it couldn't be partitioned into two independent single processor
operations (however, as previously referenced, 3081 did have shared
channels, each processor could access all channels ... like earlier
360/67 multiprocessor) eventually 3084 support came out ... which
combined two 3081s into a 4-way smp (and could be partitioned into two
3081 2-way smps).

370 "attached processor" was less expensive 2-way multiprocessor where
one processor didn't have its own dedicated channels. "less expensive"
for 370/168AP made a little sense, since 168 had external channels.  It
was something of fabrication for 370/158AP ... since 370/158 had
"integrated channels" ... i.e. the 370/158 microprocessor engine was
shared executing the 370 instruction microcode and the integrated
channel microcode.

with the failure of Future System effort
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submail.html#futuresys

there was mad rush to get stuff back into the 370 product pipelines,
this included the 303x in parallel with 3081. the 303x external channel
director (used for all 303x processors) was 370/158 engine with the
integrated channel microcode and w/o 370 instruction microcode. A 3031
was a 370/158 engine with just the 370 instruction microcode and a 2nd
370/158 engine with just the integrated microcode. A 3031 multiprocessor
was actually four 370/158 engines (two with 370 instruction microcode
and two with integrated channel microcode).

3032 was 370/168 reworked to work with 303x channel director.

3033 started out with 370/168 logic remapped to 20% faster chips.
Before ship, some of the logic was reworked to take advantage of higher
circuit density in the faster chips ... eventually shipped 50% faster
than 370/168.

besides 360/65 smp tightly-coupled multiprocessor ... there was 360
loosely-coupled (twin-tailed disk controllers hooked to different
processor specific channels going to independent single processor
systems ... rather than emulated shared i/o for tightly coupled
multiprocessor). ASP spooling supported loosely-coupled ... also airline
control program (ACP) had loosely-coupled support (for both scale-up and
availability).

shared disk loosely-coupled access was managed with device
"reserve/release" i/o ....  i.e. reserve disk for specific processor
access and release when done (basically processor/device exclusive lock)

3830 disk controller (for 3330 and later 3350 disks) could have
four-tailed channel connections. In the late 70s, there was a 3830
controller "airline control program" feature for fine-grain locking
... basically able to do i/o operation that "named" a lock managed by
the 3830 controller ... which could be obtained and released.
discussed in this old email
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008i.html#email800325
in this post
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008i.html#39 American Airlines

3330s also had a feature called "string-switch" where a string of 3330
disks could be connected to 3830 controllers (theorically each connected
to four channels to four different processors ... providing for up to
eight system sharing).

One of the largest virtual-machine based online services in the 70s was
the internal online HONE system providing world-wide sales&marketing
support. The US HONE datacenters were consolidated at 1501 cal in the
mid-70s (more recently a newer bldg. was built at 1601 cal and occupied
by FACEBOOK, 1501 has a different occupant now). Majority of HONE
applications were implemented in APL making the load quite compute
intensive. 1501 was putting in multiple multi-processor 370/168AP (it
needed processor capacity ... not so much i/o capacity) ... and was
heading for eight such two-processor complexes ... all sharing large
3330 disk farm. HONE developed a special compare&swap channel program
sequence involving customer CKD "search-id" channel programs (it
required extra revolutions ... but was more efficient than device
reserve/release).

3081 was suppose to be multi-processor smp only ... no uniprocessor was
going to be offerred. There were two problems 1) TPF (renamed airline
control program) didn't have tightly-coupled, shared-memory support
(just loosely-coupled support) and 2) 370 clone processor vendors were
offering newer, faster single-processor machine. This eventually forced
the release of single-processor 3081, called 3083. It was something of a
problem ... basically a processor unit had to be removed from the 3081
cabinet. The cabinet was wired for processor0 at the top of the cabinet;
simply removing processor1 left the cabinet (dangerously) top-heavy.

The four-way 3084 (two 3081s tied together) resulted in stressing vm370
and mvs multiprocessor support ... not so much lock contention ... but
cache-line trashing. There was special cache-line sensitivity project
for both vm370 and mvs ... that went through kernel code making storage
cache-aligned ... so two different storage areas (potentially
concurrently being used by different processors) didn't occupy the same
cache line. This effort supposedly improved overall system throughput by
something like 5percent.

misc. past posts mentioning smp and/or compare&swap
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#smp

-- 
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

Back to comp.arch | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

'smttter IBMdroids Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> - 2011-08-31 22:15 -0400
  Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> - 2011-08-31 22:20 -0400
    Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2011-08-31 22:31 -0400
      Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-01 07:30 -0700
  Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-01 09:48 -0700
    Re: 'smttter IBMdroids nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-01 17:58 +0100
    Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2011-09-01 10:58 -0700
      Re: 'smttter IBMdroids nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-01 18:51 +0100
    Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2011-09-01 15:42 -0400
    Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-01 18:19 -0500
      Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2011-09-01 20:57 -0400
      Re: 'smttter IBMdroids nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-02 09:17 +0100
      Re: 'smttter IBMdroids nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-02 09:19 +0100
        Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-02 04:44 -0500
          Re: 'smttter IBMdroids nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-02 11:39 +0100
            Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-02 11:14 -0500
        Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-02 04:47 -0500
          Re: 'smttter IBMdroids nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-02 11:26 +0100
          Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2011-09-02 08:48 -0400
          Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2011-09-02 09:29 -0400
  Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Del Cecchi <delcecchi@gmail.com> - 2011-09-01 17:15 -0500
    Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-02 10:10 -0700
      Re: innovation from Armonk, was 'smttter IBMdroids John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2011-09-02 21:21 +0000
        Re: innovation from Armonk, was 'smttter IBMdroids nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-02 21:56 +0100
        Re: innovation from Armonk, was 'smttter IBMdroids Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2011-09-02 17:49 -0400
      Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Del Cecchi <delcecchi@gmail.com> - 2011-09-02 18:04 -0500
        Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Thomas Womack <twomack@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2011-09-03 00:16 +0100
          Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-03 14:25 -0400
            Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Thomas Womack <twomack@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2011-09-03 20:09 +0100
        Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-03 22:02 -0400
          Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Del Cecchi <delcecchi@gmail.com> - 2011-09-03 21:50 -0500
            Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-03 23:52 -0400
      Re: 'smttter IBMdroids "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-09-05 08:26 -0700
        Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2011-09-05 11:14 -0700
          Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-09-05 22:05 +0200
          Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-05 17:27 -0400
        Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-05 17:16 -0400
          Re: 'smttter IBMdroids "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-09-05 14:40 -0700
            Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-05 15:45 -0700
        Re: 'smttter IBMdroids Del Cecchi <delcecchi@gmail.com> - 2011-09-06 21:47 -0500

csiph-web