swtp6809 simulator being contributed to open-simh project by rfromafar · Pull Request #357 · open-simh/simh

rfromafar · 2024-02-21T23:22:45Z

Back in the winter of 2021, I wrote a simulator for the SWTPC 6809 computer. The simulator was based on the existing swtp6800 simulator written by William Beech. I have decided that I would like to contribute this to the open-simh project. I have cleaned up the code somewhat so that it can reviewed. My next steps would be to create a user document similar to the one which was created for the swtp6800 simulator. This simulator emulates the following system:

SWTPC MP-09 CPU board with Dynamic Address Translation for 20-bit physical addressing
MC6809 CPU emulation
single BOOTROM emulating various EPROM sizes (replaces the 4 2K EPROMs on the MP-09 CPU board)
MP-B3 motherboard with 8 SS-30 I/O slots each assigned 4 bytes of addressing
MP-1M memory which emulates 1MB of RAM
MP-S serial card
DC-4 floppy controller (some modifications from the original used by swtp6800 simulator)
It runs Flex 9 DSK images very well. I am willing to provide time for debugging and resolving any issues with this simulator.
I am new to GIT and the project, so, any advice you can provide is appreciated. THANK YOU!

pkoning2 · 2024-02-22T15:00:05Z

Thanks!
If I understand correctly, this is mostly the work of William Beech with additions and modifications you wrote. It looks like he has a BSD-style or MIT-style license on the files, so that would suggest there isn't an issue there. I'm wondering, though, if you have mentioned to him that you've made this submission. While apparently not required it seems like a good courtesy to do so.

Apart from that, I'd like to hear from other SG members to confirm we're ok with the license on these files.

One other detail is that the CMake control files should be updated for this new simulator. @bscottm can you help with that?

rfromafar · 2024-02-22T15:18:48Z

Hello Paul, It is very exciting to hear from you and the project. No, I have not reached out to William Beech. I would be glad to do so. I do see that he has a website at "nj7p.info", but, there is no way to contact him there. Would you know his email? Yes, I wanted to make sure that it is understood that the swtp6809 simulator was basically started as a copy of the swtp6800 simulator which written by him. Thank you! --R From: "Paul Koning" ***@***.***> To: "open-simh/simh" ***@***.***> Cc: "Richard Lukes" ***@***.***>, "Author" ***@***.***> Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 9:00:17 AM Subject: Re: [open-simh/simh] swtp6809 simulator being contributed to open-simh project (PR #357) Thanks! If I understand correctly, this is mostly the work of William Beech with additions and modifications you wrote. It looks like he has a BSD-style license on the files, so that would suggest there isn't an issue there. I'm wondering, though, if you have mentioned to him that you've made this submission. While apparently not required it seems like a good courtesy to do so. Apart from that, I'd like to hear from other SG members to confirm we're ok with the license on these files. One other detail is that the CMake control files should be updated for this new simulator. [ https://github.com/bscottm | @bscottm ] can you help with that? — Reply to this email directly, [ #357 (comment) | view it on GitHub ] , or [ https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BF3JKKJSACLDWZYZBMWNIA3YU5MQDAVCNFSM6AAAAABDT5VHT6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSNJZGYZTEMJUGU | unsubscribe ] . You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Message ID: < ***@***.*** >

rfromafar · 2024-02-22T15:26:55Z

I'll try [ ***@***.*** | ***@***.*** ] --R From: "Richard Lukes" ***@***.***> To: "open-simh" ***@***.***> Cc: "open-simh" ***@***.***>, "Author" ***@***.***> Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 9:18:43 AM Subject: Re: [open-simh/simh] swtp6809 simulator being contributed to open-simh project (PR #357) Hello Paul, It is very exciting to hear from you and the project. No, I have not reached out to William Beech. I would be glad to do so. I do see that he has a website at "nj7p.info", but, there is no way to contact him there. Would you know his email? Yes, I wanted to make sure that it is understood that the swtp6809 simulator was basically started as a copy of the swtp6800 simulator which written by him. Thank you! --R From: "Paul Koning" ***@***.***> To: "open-simh/simh" ***@***.***> Cc: "Richard Lukes" ***@***.***>, "Author" ***@***.***> Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 9:00:17 AM Subject: Re: [open-simh/simh] swtp6809 simulator being contributed to open-simh project (PR #357) Thanks! If I understand correctly, this is mostly the work of William Beech with additions and modifications you wrote. It looks like he has a BSD-style license on the files, so that would suggest there isn't an issue there. I'm wondering, though, if you have mentioned to him that you've made this submission. While apparently not required it seems like a good courtesy to do so. Apart from that, I'd like to hear from other SG members to confirm we're ok with the license on these files. One other detail is that the CMake control files should be updated for this new simulator. [ https://github.com/bscottm | @bscottm ] can you help with that? — Reply to this email directly, [ #357 (comment) | view it on GitHub ] , or [ https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BF3JKKJSACLDWZYZBMWNIA3YU5MQDAVCNFSM6AAAAABDT5VHT6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSNJZGYZTEMJUGU | unsubscribe ] . You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Message ID: < ***@***.*** >

rcornwell · 2024-02-22T17:29:06Z

Couple points.

There should be a document file describing how to run this simulator.
The commit messages do not follow the established convention of simulator: change

rfromafar · 2024-02-22T17:48:59Z

Hello Richard, I see that existing documents are in the Word 97-2003 DOC format. I plan to have the documentation ready in a couple of days. Apologies for not including with my "pull request". I'll do some digging to understand the convention used for commit messages. Thank you! --R From: "Richard Cornwell" ***@***.***> To: "open-simh" ***@***.***> Cc: "Richard Lukes" ***@***.***>, "Author" ***@***.***> Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 11:29:18 AM Subject: Re: [open-simh/simh] swtp6809 simulator being contributed to open-simh project (PR #357) Couple points. 1. There should be a document file describing how to run this simulator. 2. The commit messages do not follow the established convention of simulator: change — Reply to this email directly, [ #357 (comment) | view it on GitHub ] , or [ https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BF3JKKLLZFHJWK2Y2TEIOTLYU5565AVCNFSM6AAAAABDT5VHT6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSNJZHEZDMNBSGE | unsubscribe ] . You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Message ID: < ***@***.*** >

rfromafar · 2024-02-23T14:10:24Z

I see that the builds for XP and Win10 failed required checks. I am thinking/hoping this is due to the fact that I did not convert my source files to DOS format using UNIX2DOS prior to check-in.

I have a question about next steps in the process...

If I check-in changes, such as converting to DOS format, would they still be under this pull-request? Or, do I make the necessary changes and then make another pull request?

BTW, I also need to check-in the simulator user guide (DOC file) and a copy of the SWTPC S-BUGE monitor BOOTROM file which I will do this weekend.

Thank you!
--Richard

pkoning2 · 2024-02-23T14:47:48Z

I think that the MS tools are capable of handling Unix line endings. However, the convention in this project is to use DOS line endings.
For cleanups, addressing review comments, or adding in missing elements such as a documentation file, adding them to the existing PR is a good answer. Work that significantly deviates from or generalizes what your current PR proposes is best done in a separate PR.
For example: do you want to proceed with this PR that is just 6809? Or do what was discussed, which is to cover the family and have your 6809 work as one variant? For the former, this PR is the way to do that, including any cleanups that should be done for it. But if you want to stop the 6809-only submission and replace it by a general one, I would recommend closing this PR and submitting a new PR for that new larger work instead (which I suppose might take some time to create).

pkoning2 · 2024-02-23T14:48:55Z

@bscottm do you have any idea what went wrong with the Windows based builds? They are cmake ones, but I can't decipher the logs to see what the problem is.

bscottm · 2024-02-23T19:26:13Z

@bscottm do you have any idea what went wrong with the Windows based builds? They are cmake ones, but I can't decipher the logs to see what the problem is.

See PR #360. It's not clear to me what changed recently in either the MS runtime or CMake argument parsing. It came down to excess quotes passed on the CMake command line. CMake should have seen a single argument, i.e., "Visual Studio 17 2022", but it was actually seeing ""Visual Studio 17 2022"" (the extra quotes.)

pkoning2 · 2024-02-23T19:29:06Z

@bscottm do you have any idea what went wrong with the Windows based builds? They are cmake ones, but I can't decipher the logs to see what the problem is.

See PR #360.

Awesome, thanks for the fast response.

bscottm · 2024-02-23T20:07:58Z

@pkoning2: For this to build with CMake, need to update cmake/simgen/packaging.py adding this simulator to the swtp_family of simulators. Then run generate.py to update or create the respective CMakeLists.txt.

pkoning2 · 2024-02-23T21:15:57Z

So, @rfromafar if you could do that update @bscottm outlined, and also rebase to the latest main branch to bring in the hotfix in PR #360, that would be great because it should then make all the tests run properly.

rfromafar · 2024-02-23T21:44:50Z

Thank you very much. I will do that. I plan to work on the swtp6809 simulator this weekend and resolve some of the remaining loose ends. From: "Paul Koning" ***@***.***> To: "open-simh" ***@***.***> Cc: "Richard Lukes" ***@***.***>, "Mention" ***@***.***> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2024 3:16:09 PM Subject: Re: [open-simh/simh] swtp6809 simulator being contributed to open-simh project (PR #357) So, [ https://github.com/rfromafar | @rfromafar ] if you could do that update [ https://github.com/bscottm | @bscottm ] outlined, and also rebase to the latest main branch to bring in the hotfix in PR [ #360 | #360 ] , that would be great because it should then make all the tests run properly. — Reply to this email directly, [ #357 (comment) | view it on GitHub ] , or [ https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BF3JKKKD2RAN4W3ZSZMT7YDYVEBJTAVCNFSM6AAAAABDT5VHT6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSNRRHE4TSMZUGM | unsubscribe ] . You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Message ID: ***@***.***>

… (Pull Request) - updates to code while writing the simulator usage guide - added copyright notice to relevant source code modules - used unix2dos to format source files for DOS line terminator conventions - source code files from swtp6800 with some changes: swtp_defs.h, dc-4.c - source code files from swtp6800 that are unchanged: mp-s.

rfromafar · 2024-02-25T04:33:13Z

I believe I have rebased the code to pick up the changes made to the master. I have made some additional commits over the weekend. The user guide is uploaded to the doc folder. Copyright notices have been added to source files which contain significantly "new" code. Writing the user guide made me realize that some of the devices could benefit from additional modifiers (config settings), so, the result should be a more user-friendly simulator.

rcornwell · 2024-02-25T05:00:32Z

The commit ID's are still not following the convention. This format is a requirement. This is also to help determine what a given commit effects. There is a large number of simulators and having to look through the actual commit can cause a problem. Also the makefile and other non-simulator changes should be in a separate commit. You commit messages should be of the following format:

SWTP6809: basic commit reason.

Any more lines detailing changes as you see fit.

When looking a a commit I should be able to tell what simulator it might effect without having to dig around in the commit file list.

bscottm · 2024-02-25T07:52:08Z

@rfromafar: Instead of merging the master branch, which inserts a merge commit, open-simh generally prefers rebasing, i.e.,

$ git fetch origin master
$ git rebase origin/master

Alternatively, because it's so frequently done:

$ git pull --rebase origin master

Rebasing avoids the merge commit, but you end up having to force the next push, i.e., git push --force ....

rfromafar · 2024-02-25T15:44:17Z

Thank you all for the helpful comments. At this point, I am not planning on making any other changes in the immediate term to the swtp6809 simulator code. I did the " git pull --rebase origin master", but, likely too late. Wondering if this is salvageable, or, if I should create a new clean branch and add my files there to keep things clean. I think the only common file which I would have touched intentionally is "makefile" to add the target for swtp6809mp-09.

There is a matter of 2 files which are "common" to the swtp6800 and swtp6809 simulators:

mp-s.c (serial io) is used by the swtp6809 simulator, but, it is just a copy of the file from swtp6800 tree and therefore I am tempted to just reference mp-s.c from the swtp6800 simulator in the makefile to avoid having the same file under the swtp6809 tree.
dc-4.c (floppy controller) is used by both simulators, however, the dc-4.c version in the swtp6809 simulator has many updates. It will take some time to merge the code into one file. The other option is to rename the file in the swtp6809 tree to dc-4_6809.c at least for now.

The initial check-in comments would be something like "swtp6809: initial commit for contribution of new simulator for the SWTPC 6809 MP-09 computer system". Anyway, my branch should now be up to date to evaluate. Thanks again!

bscottm · 2024-02-25T15:51:24Z

Thank you all for the helpful comments. At this point, I am not planning on making any other changes in the immediate term to the swtp6809 simulator code. I did the " git pull --rebase origin master", but, likely too late. Wondering if this is salvageable, or, if I should create a new clean branch and add my files there to keep things clean.

@rfromafar: Everything is salvageable. You can squash the commits via a git rebase -i. Do a git log, looking for your first commit in this series. Then copy the first 8 digits of the SHA of the commit that precedes your first commit in this series. You'll end up in your favorite editor (or nano, if you don't have EDITOR set in your environment), at which point you leave the first line alone and change all subsequent lines to squash. You may have to resolve some conflicts along the way... and then you'll end up being asked to consolidate the commit message.

Going with a new clean branch is also perfectly viable if rebasing and squashing commits is terrifying.

markpizz · 2024-02-27T23:05:42Z

Since the developer of the SWTP6800 simulator is still around and still messing with this and/or other simulators the general simh concept has historically been that one should work with that developer to get their input relating to fixes, additions prior to making such changes.

pkoning2 · 2024-02-28T00:18:48Z

Since the developer of the SWTP6800 simulator is still around and still messing with this and/or other simulators the general simh concept has historically been that one should work with that developer to get their input relating to fixes, additions prior to making such changes.

He has been giving that input on the mailing list.

# This is the 1st commit message: Richard Lukes - 18 FEB 2024 This is my initial commit of my swtp6809 emulator which is a modified version of the swtp6800 emulator. The following changes are still outstanding: - various code clean up tasks and removal of temporary comments - bootrom.c - reset() appears to be performing attach() funtion, I plan to clean up soon - mp-b3.c - want to add #define for 4 bytes per slot versus 16 bytes per slot - dc-4.c - trying to understand the changes I made from the original dc-4.c in the swtp6800 emulator - I will do additional testing, however, for now this boots Flex 9.0 and appears to be working fine # This is the commit message open-simh#2: In preparation of presenting for contribution as a "pull request". General clean up of code. Removed unneeded test prints that were used for debugging. Removed swtp_sbuge_bin.h which implemented BOOTROM code internally. Users should use "ATTACH BOOTROM <sbuge.bin filename>". Added reset() routine to CPU. If last line in INI file is "RESET CPU" then simulator goes straight into BOOTROM from reset vector at $FFFE. Tested with several FLEX 9 DSK files. Known issues are: 1) Backspace (BS) does not seem to work when running Flex 9. 2) When simulator starts up the PC has a value of $FFFF (and not $FFFE). 3) No DMAF1/DMAF2 disk emulation which is required for support of UniFlex. 4) No documentation has been written yet. However, I am more than willing to put something together. Note this code was developed using Debian on Raspberry Pi 4. There may be Unix/DOS file conversion issues. # This is the commit message open-simh#3: swtp6809 simulator being contributed to open-simh project open-simh#357 (Pull Request) - updates to code while writing the simulator usage guide - added copyright notice to relevant source code modules - used unix2dos to format source files for DOS line terminator conventions - source code files from swtp6800 with some changes: swtp_defs.h, dc-4.c - source code files from swtp6800 that are unchanged: mp-s. # This is the commit message open-simh#4: CMake: Reduce excess quoting cmake/cmake-builder.ps1 added quotes to arguments that contained spaces, so that arguments printed correctly for progress output. This introduced excess quotes that caused CMake (and likely other MS apps) confusion or argument misinterpretation. Instead of CMake seeing a single "Visual Studio 17 2022", CMake was actually seeing "\"Visual Studio 17 2022\"". This patch only adds the additional quotes when reporting progress or emitting debug output. Otherwise, command line arguments are passed unmolested. # This is the commit message open-simh#5: The user doc file for the swtp6809 simulator SWTP 6809 Simulator Usage guide.

(Pull Request)

bscottm · 2024-04-05T19:24:37Z

@pkoning2, @rcornwell, @rfromafar Umm... I was going to look into the cmake problem, but this appears OBE'd.

Actually, if the simulator has been added to the makefile, python3 cmake/generate.py should automagically take care of the CMake build setup.

(OBE: Overrun/Overwhelmed By Events.)

rfromafar closed this Apr 4, 2024

rfromafar force-pushed the master branch from 330a52e to ffe537a Compare April 4, 2024 01:18

rfromafar added a commit to rfromafar/simh that referenced this pull request Apr 4, 2024

swtp6809: simulator being contributed to open-simh project open-simh#357

c2ba202

(Pull Request)

rfromafar added a commit to rfromafar/simh that referenced this pull request Apr 4, 2024

swtp6809: simulator being contributed to open-simh project open-simh#357

a1af415

(Pull Request)

Conversation

rfromafar commented Feb 21, 2024

Uh oh!

pkoning2 commented Feb 22, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rfromafar commented Feb 22, 2024 via email

Uh oh!

rfromafar commented Feb 22, 2024 via email

Uh oh!

rcornwell commented Feb 22, 2024

Uh oh!

rfromafar commented Feb 22, 2024 via email

Uh oh!

rfromafar commented Feb 23, 2024

Uh oh!

pkoning2 commented Feb 23, 2024

Uh oh!

pkoning2 commented Feb 23, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

bscottm commented Feb 23, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

pkoning2 commented Feb 23, 2024

Uh oh!

bscottm commented Feb 23, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

pkoning2 commented Feb 23, 2024

Uh oh!

rfromafar commented Feb 23, 2024 via email

Uh oh!

rfromafar commented Feb 25, 2024

Uh oh!

rcornwell commented Feb 25, 2024

Uh oh!

bscottm commented Feb 25, 2024

Uh oh!

rfromafar commented Feb 25, 2024

Uh oh!

bscottm commented Feb 25, 2024

Uh oh!

markpizz commented Feb 27, 2024

Uh oh!

pkoning2 commented Feb 28, 2024

Uh oh!

bscottm commented Apr 5, 2024

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

pkoning2 commented Feb 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

pkoning2 commented Feb 23, 2024 •

edited

Loading

bscottm commented Feb 23, 2024 •

edited

Loading

bscottm commented Feb 23, 2024 •

edited

Loading