On 10/24/24 03:01, Mike Larkin wrote:
> 
> Every one of us who has worked in this area, at this level, has read those
> 800+ page documents. Sometimes they are many thousands of pages (eg the latest
> Intel SDM or latest ACPI spec).
> 
> Tell us what you are doing and what you want to know and maybe we can point
> you to the right docs, but there is no short-cutting reading the reference
> manuals.
>

I would really like to understand why this architecture stood the test
of time. Just because it boots in 8 bit CPU mode from the 70ties not
even capable of beating a 6502? Just because developers were not
continuously forced to throw away all knowledge and could build upon it?
Seems to be the reason. Intel tried to throw away legacy burdens and got
set straight by AMD. I am currently approaching page 4000 of
documentation. Shaking heads. Unbelievable. What I am lacking so far is
a current PCI bus specification. This seems to not be available to non
members who I am certainly not. Coming from a hardware background,
documents like this

<https://www.intel.sg/content/dam/doc/datasheet/io-controller-hub-10-family-datasheet.pdf>

clearly were a waste of time, at least when your goal is not to produce
mainboards. Well. Normally you would program devices directly. It even
contains write-once-by-firmware registers. It will take some time for me
to understand the reasoning behind this. Not questioning there are no
reasons for doing it that way. I am just trying to make me stop hating
that architecture. I am still failing at this task but I would like to
overcome this. At least it has linear address space. Oh. What a wonder.
Every 68k had this decades ago. Oh sorry. Your comments are very helpful
to me so far so thank you. Because the machine independent parts in the
kernel really are abstractions of formerly machine dependent parts,
understanding the worst case of those - namely x86 and amd64 - will help
me understand those. I am still in the process of reading x86/amd64
documentation even if it make me shake my head every so often.

Regards,
-- 
Christian

Reply via email to