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

Groups > comp.misc > #17882 > unrolled thread

Transputer

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  Transputer Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> - 2019-04-27 06:09 +0000
    Re: Transputer Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2019-04-27 09:08 +0100
      Re: Transputer Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2019-04-27 11:28 +0000
    Re: Transputer Steve555 <Steve555@bogus.nodomain.nowhere.invalid> - 2019-06-15 20:05 +0000
      Re: Transputer Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2019-06-15 23:07 +0000
        Re: Transputer Steve555 <Steve555@reallybogus.nodomain.nowhere.invalid> - 2019-06-16 22:54 +0000
      Re: Transputer Stephen Hall <s__hall@gmail.com> - 2019-06-17 03:50 +0000
        Re: Transputer Jerry Peters <jerry@example.invalid> - 2019-06-17 20:23 +0000
          Re: Transputer kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) - 2019-06-18 09:43 -0400

#17882 — Transputer

Retrotechtacular: Transputer
by: Jenny List, April 19, 2019
- https://hackaday.com/2019/04/19/retrotechtacular-transputer/

"Back in 2016, Hackaday published a review of The National Museum
 of Computing, at Bletchley Park. It mentions among the fascinating
 array of computer artifacts on display a single box that could be
 found in the corner of a room alongside their Cray-1 supercomputer.
 This was a Transputer development system, and though its
 architecture is almost forgotten today there was a time when this
 British-developed microprocessor family had a real prospect of
 representing the future of computing. So what on earth was the
 Transputer, why was it special, and why don't we have one on every
 desk in 2019?

 Inmos, based in Bristol, were a - no, make that the - British
 semiconductor company, in the days when governments saw such things
 as a home-grown semiconductor manufacturing capability to be of
 strategic importance. They made microcomputer peripheral chips, RAM
 chips, and video chips (the workaday silicon of 1980s computing) but
 their exciting project was the Transputer.

 This microprocessor family addressed the speed bottlenecks inherent
 to conventional processors of the day by being built from the ground
 up to be massively multiprocessor. A network of Transputer
 processors would share a web of serial interconnects arranged in a
 crosspoint formation, allowing multiple of them to connect with each
 other independently and without collisions. It was the first to
 feature such an architecture, and at the time was seen as the Next
 Big Thing. All computers were going to use Transputers by the end of
 the 1990s, so electronic engineering students were taught all about
 them and encountered them in their group projects. I remember my
 year of third-year EE class would split into groups, each of tasked
 with a part of a greater project that would communicate through the
 crosspoint switch at the heart of one of the Transputer systems,
 though my recollection is that none of the groups went so far as to
 get anything to work. Still how this machine was designed is fun to
 look back on in modern times. Let's dig in!" ...

-- 
__          __
#_ < |\| |< _#

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#17883

Computer Nerd Kev wrote:

> A network of Transputer processors would share a web of serial
> interconnects arranged in a crosspoint formation

While choosing my final year degree project, I noticed the CS department 
  had a transputer development system available, my project got rejected 
when it turned out they only had a single transputer ... I ended up 
using Apollo workstations instead

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17884

On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 09:08:16 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

> Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
> 
>> A network of Transputer processors would share a web of serial
>> interconnects arranged in a crosspoint formation
> 
> While choosing my final year degree project, I noticed the CS department
>   had a transputer development system available, my project got rejected
> when it turned out they only had a single transputer ... I ended up
> using Apollo workstations instead

We had rather more at Kent.

Our Computing Lab acquired a MEiKO Computing Surface, a parallel computer 
initially with 20 T414 (first generation) transputers growing to 185 
T800s (second generation). Funded entirely through research grants, this 
was made open access for all research groups at Kent and undergraduate 
and taught Master's projects. 



-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18215

On 2019-04-27, Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote:
> Retrotechtacular: Transputer
> by: Jenny List, April 19, 2019
> - https://hackaday.com/2019/04/19/retrotechtacular-transputer/
>
> "Back in 2016, Hackaday published a review of The National Museum
>  of Computing, at Bletchley Park. It mentions among the fascinating
>  array of computer artifacts on display a single box that could be
>  found in the corner of a room alongside their Cray-1 supercomputer.
>  This was a Transputer development system, and though its
>  architecture is almost forgotten today there was a time when this
>  British-developed microprocessor family had a real prospect of
>  representing the future of computing. So what on earth was the
>  Transputer, why was it special, and why don't we have one on every

My uni had some transputer projects, both in the comp sci department
and the electronics dept.  It had its own language called Occam.
Parallelism was a big thing in algorithm research at the time,
which this hardware was designed to execute.  People were using
them for things like high performance image processing and
robotics.

Steve555

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18217

On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 20:05:47 +0000, Steve555 wrote:

> On 2019-04-27, Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote:
>> Retrotechtacular: Transputer by: Jenny List, April 19, 2019 -
>> https://hackaday.com/2019/04/19/retrotechtacular-transputer/
>>
>> "Back in 2016, Hackaday published a review of The National Museum
>>  of Computing, at Bletchley Park. It mentions among the fascinating
>>  array of computer artifacts on display a single box that could be
>>  found in the corner of a room alongside their Cray-1 supercomputer.
>>  This was a Transputer development system, and though its architecture
>>  is almost forgotten today there was a time when this British-developed
>>  microprocessor family had a real prospect of representing the future
>>  of computing. So what on earth was the Transputer, why was it special,
>>  and why don't we have one on every
> 
> My uni had some transputer projects, both in the comp sci department and
> the electronics dept.  It had its own language called Occam. Parallelism
> was a big thing in algorithm research at the time, which this hardware
> was designed to execute.  People were using them for things like high
> performance image processing and robotics.

We had a lot of transputer research going on, and a large Mieko computing 
surface. Not my thing, but a close colleague was involved.

Occam survived the exit of the Meiko, and Occam-Pi was still being taught 
about 4 years ago. Then the colleague left, just after me.

-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18222

On 2019-06-15, Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 20:05:47 +0000, Steve555 wrote:
>
>> On 2019-04-27, Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote:
>>> Retrotechtacular: Transputer by: Jenny List, April 19, 2019 -
>>> https://hackaday.com/2019/04/19/retrotechtacular-transputer/
>>>
>>> "Back in 2016, Hackaday published a review of The National Museum
>>>  of Computing, at Bletchley Park. It mentions among the fascinating
>>>  array of computer artifacts on display a single box that could be
>>>  found in the corner of a room alongside their Cray-1 supercomputer.
>>>  This was a Transputer development system, and though its architecture
>>>  is almost forgotten today there was a time when this British-developed
>>>  microprocessor family had a real prospect of representing the future
>>>  of computing. So what on earth was the Transputer, why was it special,
>>>  and why don't we have one on every
>> 
>> My uni had some transputer projects, both in the comp sci department and
>> the electronics dept.  It had its own language called Occam. Parallelism
>> was a big thing in algorithm research at the time, which this hardware
>> was designed to execute.  People were using them for things like high
>> performance image processing and robotics.
>
> We had a lot of transputer research going on, and a large Mieko computing 
> surface. Not my thing, but a close colleague was involved.
>
> Occam survived the exit of the Meiko, and Occam-Pi was still being taught 
> about 4 years ago. Then the colleague left, just after me.
>
I think at the time there were lots of projects funded by the
UK government 'Alvey' program, including a lot of AI stuff.
And some of that money got used for all the transputer projects.

-- 
  Gnd  -|o----|- Vcc      Hey computer, what's the weather in Sydney?
 trig  -| 555 |- dschrg   $> finger o:sydney@graph.no|tail -1|espeak
  o/p  -|     |- thrsh
  rst  -|-----|- cntrl    Steve555

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18225

Steve555 <Steve555@bogus.nodomain.nowhere.invalid> wrote:
> On 2019-04-27, Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote:
>> Retrotechtacular: Transputer
>> by: Jenny List, April 19, 2019
>> - https://hackaday.com/2019/04/19/retrotechtacular-transputer/
>> 
>> "Back in 2016, Hackaday published a review of The National Museum
>> of Computing, at Bletchley Park. It mentions among the fascinating
>> array of computer artifacts on display a single box that could be
>> found in the corner of a room alongside their Cray-1 supercomputer.
>> This was a Transputer development system, and though its
>> architecture is almost forgotten today there was a time when this
>> British-developed microprocessor family had a real prospect of
>> representing the future of computing. So what on earth was the
>> Transputer, why was it special, and why don't we have one on every
> 
> My uni had some transputer projects, both in the comp sci department
> and the electronics dept.  It had its own language called Occam.

It actually makes sense. I suspect there is no way for revolution in
computing without new processors and new language for them.

For many, many years Intel and competitors were making processors that just
emulate PDP-11 architecture. I'm not the only one who thinks this is the
issue:

<https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=3212479>

> The root cause of the Spectre and Meltdown vulnerabilities was that
> processor architects were trying to build not just fast processors, but
> fast processors that expose the same abstract machine as a PDP-11. This
> is essential because it allows C programmers to continue in the belief
> that their language is close to the underlying hardware.

If people want more from their hardware they should be willing to write
their software accordingly.

-- 
S. Hall

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18234

Stephen Hall <s__hall@gmail.com> wrote:
> Steve555 <Steve555@bogus.nodomain.nowhere.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2019-04-27, Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote:
>>> Retrotechtacular: Transputer
>>> by: Jenny List, April 19, 2019
>>> - https://hackaday.com/2019/04/19/retrotechtacular-transputer/
>>> 
>>> "Back in 2016, Hackaday published a review of The National Museum
>>> of Computing, at Bletchley Park. It mentions among the fascinating
>>> array of computer artifacts on display a single box that could be
>>> found in the corner of a room alongside their Cray-1 supercomputer.
>>> This was a Transputer development system, and though its
>>> architecture is almost forgotten today there was a time when this
>>> British-developed microprocessor family had a real prospect of
>>> representing the future of computing. So what on earth was the
>>> Transputer, why was it special, and why don't we have one on every
>> 
>> My uni had some transputer projects, both in the comp sci department
>> and the electronics dept.  It had its own language called Occam.
> 
> It actually makes sense. I suspect there is no way for revolution in
> computing without new processors and new language for them.
> 
> For many, many years Intel and competitors were making processors that just
> emulate PDP-11 architecture. I'm not the only one who thinks this is the
> issue:
> 
> <https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=3212479>
> 
>> The root cause of the Spectre and Meltdown vulnerabilities was that
>> processor architects were trying to build not just fast processors, but
>> fast processors that expose the same abstract machine as a PDP-11. This
>> is essential because it allows C programmers to continue in the belief
>> that their language is close to the underlying hardware.
> 
> If people want more from their hardware they should be willing to write
> their software accordingly.
> 
Except that S390 & succesors, whose ISA is nothing like a pdp-11 is
also subject to Spectre.

Linux written mainly in C runs on everything for X86 to S390 and
RISC-V. Lots of different ISA's, yet C is low-level enough.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18238

Jerry Peters  <jerry@example.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>> If people want more from their hardware they should be willing to write
>> their software accordingly.
>> 
>Except that S390 & succesors, whose ISA is nothing like a pdp-11 is
>also subject to Spectre.

Any system that uses branch prediction for cache prefetch is subject to this
sort of attack, if it has a good enough timer.  This goes way back.

This likely includes the 360/91 although I'm not sure if the fancy timer
arrangement on it is accurate enough.  The IBM 7030 STRETCH has branch
prediction that could be vulnerable to statistical attacks, but it doesn't
have a good enough timer to exploit them.

>Linux written mainly in C runs on everything for X86 to S390 and
>RISC-V. Lots of different ISA's, yet C is low-level enough.

On PDP-11-like architectures, C is really all you need.  It gets weird on
dsp machines, machines with variable word length, and so forth, though.
--scott

-- 
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web