From caperkin@ursa11.law.utah.edu Thu Jun 24 21:35:31 1993
Return-Path: <caperkin@ursa11.law.utah.edu>
Received: from gossip.pyramid.com by dutecai.et.tudelft.nl (4.1/1.34JP)
          id AA12072; Thu, 24 Jun 93 21:35:20 +0200
Received: from sword.eng.pyramid.com 
	by gossip.pyramid.com (5.61/OSx5.1a Pyramid-Internet-Gateway)
	id AA28727; Thu, 24 Jun 93 12:35:10 -0700
Received: from goss.pyramid.com
	by sword.eng.pyramid.com (5.61/Pyramid_Internal_Configuration)
	id AA28613; Thu, 24 Jun 93 12:35:04 -0700
Received: from cs.utah.edu 
	by gossip.pyramid.com (5.61/OSx5.1a Pyramid-Internet-Gateway)
	id AA28714; Thu, 24 Jun 93 12:35:02 -0700
Received: from ursa11.law.utah.edu by cs.utah.edu (5.65/utah-2.21-cs)
	id AA07251; Thu, 24 Jun 93 13:34:59 -0600
Received: by ursa11.law.utah.edu (5.65/utah-2.11sun-leaf)
	id AA15076; Thu, 24 Jun 93 13:39:15 -0600
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 93 13:39:15 -0600
From: caperkin@ursa11.law.utah.edu (Charles Perkins)
Message-Id: <9306241939.AA15076@ursa11.law.utah.edu>
To: riscy@pyramid.com
Subject: endian
Status: RO
X-Status: 


Tests great!  Less swapping!  Tests great!  Less swapping!

um...

I favor big endian for the mips project for two reasons:

1. Binary compatibility hacks with other Mips systems will be
   impossible or incredibly difficult otherwise.

2. It would be a very good idea to leverege off the architectural independence
   work of the 68000 port.  I am not talking about a port of their port, rather
   that we work in tandem with them in building a portable linux source tree.
   And the neat thing is, they're allready dealing with the little-big-endian 
   issue.

3. I like big-endian.  (Not a reason.  A bias.)

The problem I see is with interfacing with the ISA bus.  The software will have to know how to
deal with the endianness, or there will have to be a hardware swap.
Does the nifty bus controller already deal with that?
How much more difficult would this make writing device drivers?

If SCSI, ethernet and video are on the motherboard, I think that we don't need to invent
another super-nifty multi-cool expansion slot system. 

a) that is hard
b) we probably wouldn't get it right the first time
c) most of the fast stuff is already on the motherboard

I agree that an ISA bus would be neat and allow us to put lots of 
clone cards in the system, but I could live even without this.

However, I feel that we should run every line going to the cpu also
to some sort of connector.  Just one.  A bunch of other signals can
go to/come from this slot, but the important thing is to allow
someone else, later, to put a daughter card there that perhaps 
can do the nifty bus stuff, or whatever.  Perhaps someone
would like to make an AXP daughtercard.  Or a 486 card to allow
running of Linux binaries.  Make it simple.  Don't worry about
how others might use it.  And the great thing is, it is just
the cost of a (perhaps very big) connector.  Cheap.  Which I 
appreciate.


 
