'architected'?
So, I've been rereading some docs lately, and am wondering what 'architected' really is.
Here's an example, dug up by Dave Kennedy. This is on page 3, under the heading '2. PDC Procedures' in pdc.pdf:
"The architected operation of a module (including execution of a PDC) must not require the use of any non-architected PDC procedures. It must also not require the use of any non-architected options in architected PDC produces."
Can someone at HP clarify?
- Alex
Signature · 3 lines
Alex deVries Vice President of Engineering The Puffin Group
Quoted 10 lines
So, I've been rereading some docs lately, and am wondering what 'architected' really is.
Here's an example, dug up by Dave Kennedy. This is on page 3, under the heading '2. PDC Procedures' in pdc.pdf:
"The architected operation of a module (including execution of a PDC) must not require the use of any non-architected PDC procedures. It must also not require the use of any non-architected options in architected PDC produces."
I don't have the documents in front of me, so forgive me if I get a name or 6 wrong... The PDC Procedures Document (and anything with the same cover page, such as the Generic Modules Document) comprise what used to be called the "Architecture Control Document." An "architected" thing is discussed in those documents, un-architected things generally are not. Just to make matters interesting, you will see mention in the documents to SV (software version specific), and HV (hardware version specific) features.
The paragraph you cite indicates that hardware (modules) cannot require that an OS author perform HV PDC (arg0>=128) calls (or other funky stuff like DIAG instructions, or poking magic addresses not spelled out in the architecture document) in order to use the hardware in the system. In this case, "use" pretty much means anything that generic OS software needs to do with the module to initialize it. In other words, the bus walk.
Sadly, certain hardware is not quite compliant with the architecture, in that it violates the very paragraph you cite. Most notably (from our recent discussions), the bus walk of the 7[235]0 requires magic knowledge of where things are and how to poke them nicely.
Does that help any?
lamont
Quoted 2 lines
So, I've been rereading some docs lately, and am wondering what 'architected' really is.
Isn't the obvious meaning "defined by the architecture" as opposed to implementation-specific ?
Quoted 4 lines
"The architected operation of a module (including execution of a PDC) must not require the use of any non-architected PDC procedures. It must also not require the use of any non-architected options in architected PDC produces."
"You don't have to do implementation-specific things unless you want to do implementation-specific things", I guess.
Philipp Rumpf
Quoted 6 lines · Philipp Rumpf
Quoted 3 lines
So, I've been rereading some docs lately, and am wondering what 'architected' really is.
Isn't the obvious meaning "defined by the architecture" as opposed to implementation-specific ?
Sure. But which architecture? PA-RISC? The module's design?
- Alex
Signature · 3 lines
Alex deVries Vice President of Engineering The Puffin Group