perm filename S1.DOC[D,LES] blob
sn#320365 filedate 1977-12-06 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ā VALID 00008 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00003 00002
C00004 00003 S-1 Proposal 1
C00008 00004 S-1 Proposal 2
C00013 00005 S-1 Proposal 3
C00018 00006 S-1 Proposal 4
C00022 00007 S-1 Proposal 5
C00025 00008 S-1 Proposal 6
C00028 ENDMK
Cā;
December 1977
Proposal to
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
for design of
An Operating System and Memory Switch for the S-1 Computer
John McCarthy, Professor of Computer Science
Principal Investigator
Computer Science Department
Stanford University
S-1 Proposal 1
1. Goals
The Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (SAIL) proposes to
participate in the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL) program for
development of the S-1 computer system by designing certain elements and
developing an efficient operating system over a period of three years.
This proposal covers the first 9 months' work.
The proposed work will have the following subgoals:
1) Design and begin development of an operating sysem for both single
and multiprocessor S-1 computer configurations with dedicated disk
systems. This system will provide efficient resource allocation for
configurations of 1 to 32 processors and will include user interactive
facilities that are optimized for display terminals, though teleprinter
terminals will also be supported. In addition to the operating system,
a number of utility programs will be developed, including text editors,
file management programs, compilers, and debuggers.
SAIL recognizes that the S-1 Project requires an evolving operating
system for the various computer configurations it is creating, and will
undertake to create an operating system that will have some minimal
capability early in the effort, growing thereafter in capability in
frequent increments.
2) Based on work done in pursuit of the first subgoal, recommend
specific equipment characteristics needed to support efficient
operation. This particularly includes the manner in which secondary
memories and peripherals will connect to various S-1 system
configurations.
3) Support S-1 Project hardware development, in fashions and to extents
mutualy agreed upon by cognizant SAIL and LLL staff. During the period
of this initial proposal such support activity will include detailed
design of the crossbar switch for the first S-1 multiprocessor
configuration and the post-construction debugging and documentation of
this hardware module.
S-1 Proposal 2
2. Work Plan
2.1 Operating System Development
The operating system to be developed will exploit the full suite of
capabilities of multiprocessor S-1 configurations and will use the
better features of existing timesharing systems, such as Unix, Multics,
TOPS-20, ITS, and the Stanford Monitor. However, it will also be
capable of specialization for use with single processor S-1
configurations. There will also be some innovation in interactive user
services.
A key problem to be solved is efficient allocation and scheduling of
resources. It should be possible to flexibly allocate processors either
to a number of tasks supporting independent users or to separate forks
of a single task, depending on priorities.
The planning phase of this work (of about three months' duration) will
be devoted to the following tasks:
(1) familiarization with the S-1 equipment characteristics;
(2) characterization of the principal kinds of computing tasks that are
to be performed with this system;
(3) general design of program services to be provided by the operating
system, including primary memory allocation and file system
characteristics;
(4) general design of user services, including display control, command
languages, and character set standards;
(5) analysis of other resource allocation issues;
(6) study of major existing operating systems to determine which of
their features may be profitably included in the one to be created,
and which, if any, of their major modules may be appropriately
carried over into the new operating system;
(7) formulation of criteria for selection of programming languages to
be used in major develop- ment tasks.
This phase of the work will culminate with the generation of a report
documenting the results of performing these 7 tasks.
Other products of this phase will include an assortment of planning
documents and specific recommendations on equipment design issues, such
as how the disk storage units should be interfaced to the multiprocessor
system.
The subsequent design phase (of about six months' duration) will focus
on detailed design of the functional elements of the system, selection
of system programming languages, programming of developmental tools
(e.g., simple editors and debuggers), and possibly the modification of a
compiler to produce S-1 code.
S-1 Proposal 3
2.2 Crossbar Switch Design
It is proposed to design a crossbar switch to connect 16 S-1 processors
with 16 memory modules with a maximum concurrency of 16, and a
throughput of 70 nanoseconds per word, as specified in Reference 1. The
switch will contain logic to allow an LSI-11 processor, connected
through an LLL-supplied parallel interface, to perform comprehensive
testing of the switch (both by providing artificial stimuli to the
switch, and by reading the state of switch buses and signals) and to
recover from what are considered to be probable recoverable failure
modes of the switch, processors, and memory modules.
SAIL proposes to perform the following subtasks of this basic task
during the current proposal period:
1) Familiarization of SAIL design personnel with the S-1 Design System.
2) Complete logical design of the switch using the S-1 Design System
Graphics Language.
3) Complete physical design of the switch, including layout and cable
assignment.
4) Production of final wire-lists through the S-1 Design System.
5) Debugging, including demonstration of full switch functionality,
using the LLL-supplied LSI-11 diagnostic system.
6) Documentation, including a structured text description of the
hardware to augment the structured drawings, and a high-level
description of switch operation.
All aspects of crossbar switch hardware implementation is proposed to be
the responsibility of LLL. At the completion of Step 4 (above), it is
proposed that LLL will construct the switch, associated cabinetry, and
LSI-11 debug processor, and will thereupon make the switch available for
debugging by SAIL staff. Throughout the design, cognizant SAIL staff
members will maintain close contact with cognizant LLL staff members.
3. Facilities
Much of the planning and preliminary programming work on both projects
will be performed on the existing computer facilities of the Stanford
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. Since this equipment has already
been purchased, mostly with U. S. Government research funds, the only
costs involved in its use will be the support of part of a computer
technician and a share of other maintenance costs.
It is proposed that LLL make available to the Stanford Artificial
Intelligence Laboratory fractions of the capabilities of both single
processor and multiprocessor S-1 configurations appropriate to various
phases of advanced operating systems development and debugging.
S-1 Proposal 4
Determination of how this is to be most effectively accomplished is to
be made jointly by cognizant LLL and SAIL personnel, as such needs
evolve. It is anticipated that some phone line access to LLL-based S-1
hardware configurations will be needed and a budget item to support such
access is included.
4. Coordination and Reporting
It is proposed that primary coordination between cognizant LLL and SAIL
staff members be accompished via monthly meetings, to be conducted for
approximately half-day periods. Senior SAIL Project members will
document the salient topics addressed at these conferences (including
accomplishments of the previous month, and the relatively detailed work
plan for the upcoming month) and distribute such documents to all
cognizant SAIL and LLL staff members as the primary project coordination
papers.
SAIL proposes to submit two interim technical reports to LLL dealing
with the progress made during the Winter and Spring Quarters of 1978,
and a final, comprehensive report which treats in detail all aspects of
the work done during the January-September, 1978, period. It is
anticipated that the Winter Quarter document will report the results of
the 7-point operating sysem planning phase discussed in Section 2.1, as
well as the first three items of the crossbar switch development
discussed in Section 2.2. It is likewise expected that the Spring
Quarter document will report preliminary results of the operating system
design phase of Section 2.1, and will also report successful completion
of at least 2 of the final 3 items of the switch development of Section
2.2. The final report will detail the design of the operating system of
Section 2.1, and will include the description of the switch design
implementation and debugging work of Section 2.2. All these reports
will be delivered to LLL within 30 days of the end of the periods on
whose results they report.
References
1. Tom McWilliams and Curt Widdoes, The S-1 Memory Interface, October
3, 1977.
S-1 Proposal 5
5. Budget
Nine Months Beginning 1 January 1978
Person
Months
A. Salaries and Wages
1. Senior Personnel:
a. John McCarthy 0.6 2,040
Prof. of Computer Science
5% acad. yr., 10% summer
b. Lester Earnest 1.4 4,313
Senior Research Associate
15%
2. Other Personnel:
a. Jeff Rubin 9.0 17,507
Computer Systems Spec.
b. Ted Panofsky 8.1 13,499
Design Engineer, 90%
c. Martin Frost 9.0 12,726
Systems Programmer
d. ------ 9.0 16,362
Systems Programmer
e. Student Res. Assist. 6.0 5,781
50% acad. yr., 100% sum.
f. Support Personnel:
(1) Secretary (25%) 2.3 1,858
(2) Elect. Tech. (25%) 2.3 2,555
_______
Total Salaries & Wages 76,641
B. Staff Benefits 14,669
19.0% till 1 Sept.'78,
20.3% thereafter
_______
C. Total Salaries, Wages,
and Staff Benefits 91,310
S-1 Proposal 6
D. Permanent Equipment - - -
E. Expendable Supplies & 1,200
Equipment (e.g. office
supplies, copying, postage)
F. Travel (domestic) 2,000
G. Publications 600
H. Other Costs 1,635
1. Telephone 810
2. Computer Equipment
Maintenance 825
_______
I. Total Direct Costs (A thru H) 96,745
J. Indirect Costs 56,112
(58% of A thru H less D)
_______
K. Total Costs 152,857