Title: | Embedded and Real Time Modular Computing Conference |
Moderator: | IRNBRU::GRANT |
Created: | Tue Sep 05 1995 |
Last Modified: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
Number of topics: | 235 |
Total number of notes: | 1091 |
Multiple Processors in a PICMG environment: ======================================================================= From: SHRCTR::SOMES 11-FEB-1997 15:35:17.89 To: CIMCAD::PIERSON Subj: Multiple CPUs Dave, >Question: Is there a way (According to PCIMG spec) to elaborate more than one >CPU board on the PCI Passive Backplane? Answer(s): 1. Since the CPU slot is different mechanically from the other PCI slots on the backplane, having the outline dimensions and ISA connector location of an ISA card, it is mechanically impossible to plug more than one CPU in a backplane (unless there are two CPU slots.) 2. In backplanes having two CPU compatible slots, the intent is to provide additional mechanical clearance for CPUs with high heatsinks. The unused CPU slot is usable only as an ISA slot. The CPU slot must also provide clock distribution outputs, the REQx#/GNTx# pairs for each option slot with master capability, and is the slot where the INTx lines are monitored. If two CPU's were installed, these "system controller" functions would have to be disabled on one of the two. Moreover, these extra signals make the PCI interface electrically incmpatible with standard PCI option slots. 3. The PCI architecture makes multicomputing extremely difficult, since it doesn't mandate configuration space registers on core logic PCI interfaces. Thus if a PCI CPU were built to the mechanical specifications for PCI slot cards, and were installed in a PCI option slot, it would not be enumerated by the standard BIOS or firmware images we find on the current crop of system controller platforms. 4. If a special BIOS or firmware image were implemented that permitted a PCI CPU to be configured either as a system controller or an intelligent PCI option, and allowed for manual allocation of the inbound address space associated with the chip set, it might be possible to hack a multi-computing environment. 5. As I understand it, the Intel i960RP has a PCI interface which responds to configuration space accesses, making enumeration and address space assignment by the system controller possible at powerup, and is therefore presumably suitable for use as a compute element on the PCI bus. I've heard rumors that future PCI core logic for StrongArm might do likewise.
T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
185.1 | some ramblings | RTOEU::EGAUTHIER | AUA - Another Useful Abbreviation | Wed Mar 12 1997 08:38 | 54 |
"Multiprocessing on PICMG?" Please clarify. Different people mean different things when they multiprocessing. For example, from the VME space, people usually mean multiple processors in the same backplane running different operating systems, but capable of shared memory. Others, when they hear multiprocessing, think of servers with multiple CPUs, single I/O and memory subsystems, and 1 operating system running (SMP). For the first example, I can envision new intelligent PCI cards which may meet some peoples' definition of multiprocessing. These new cards would use new bridging technology to allow for two seperate PCI spaces within the same system (codename Drawbridge). DISCLAIMER ---------- As far as I am aware, there is nothing like this under development, or even planned. Here is an idea: PICMG system. On the PCI, an I/O card that has a drawbridge interface (giving it it's own local PCI bus, but allowing it to appear as a device to the host system). On the I/O card, behind the drawbridge, a foot-bridge (PCI support bridge for StrongARM) and a StrongARM running your choice of real-time OS. The card could then interface with the real world in many different ways (PC104, Cardbus, Industry Pack, PMC, your choice of field-bus, etc.) Package a real-time OS with the board which is canned (pre-configured to support a given application) and your real-time OS is really just a device driver. Now for the host system, we will probably need some software support for mapping, and synchronization between the host processor and the StrongARM. What do you have? For the older folks out there, you will say "VAX RTA". However you could have, a low end PLC (or a high end PLC), or a powerful CNC machine, or a high end communications box, or a high end data data acquisition system, or a real-time video encoding box, or a ....well you get the idea... Again, as far as I know, there are no plans in this area...but maybe their should be. Just thinking out loud. -Eric | |||||
185.2 | Multiprocessing .ne. SMP | BBPBV1::WALLACE | john wallace @ bbp. +44 860 675093 | Wed Mar 12 1997 09:08 | 21 |
Eric, I know somebody (you knew him too) who apparently has done something like you suggest in your "intelligent PCI cards" para (but with 21066 not StrongArm, and without Drawbridge). As you say, it all depends on what the customer means by multiprocessing. With PCI, it's unlikely ever to be "one shared-memory OS across multiple CPUs" ie what we commonly refer to as SMP. (Never? Maybe.) So what? With the "attached processor(s)" concept there are lots of ways of envisioning a system containing more than one processor, and communicating in lots of interesting ways. We definitely don't need to "just say no" when people ask about multiprocessing. regards john |