Hey guys, does anyone know where I can get VHDL/Verilog source for the Z8001/Z8002 processor? Thanks for any info!
-Adam snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com
Hey guys, does anyone know where I can get VHDL/Verilog source for the Z8001/Z8002 processor? Thanks for any info!
-Adam snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com
"ajcrm125" schrieb im Newsbeitrag news: snipped-for-privacy@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
yes, sure!
I think some other entities have it also but not available. the Z8 project at opencores is dead and unuseable, and there is little hope that free z8000 core would exist
Antti
So you're stating that Zilog has VHDL/Verilog for the Z8000 processor and it's available to the public?
-- Grant Edwards grante Yow! All of life is a blur at of Republicans and meat!
I suppose, if you buy 51% of Zilog stock then its public for you :)
I stated where to get - not the amount of $$$ that is needed.
Antti
The Z8000 was designed before Verilog existed. I doubt that they still even have the schematics. The Z8002 is available in Verilog from
Monte
The Z8000 was designed at the transistor level by Shima, who also had designed the 4004, 8008, 8080, and Z80. No logic diagram existed when I got involved in the transfer to second-source AMD. Those were the days..(1979/80). Hi, Monte! Peter Alfke
Hello Peter, long time no see!
Yes, Shima's schematics were a nightmare to try to understand, given that he only drew transistors, and there were only signal names for signals that left a sheet. But if you laid the schematic sheets out so that the signals matched up, you had a complete floorplan of the device. And the transistors on the sheets were good guides for the layout designers when they were doing the layout, because the "density" of schematic transistors was relatively proportional to the layout density. Not like today, when I can describe a few thousand transistors in a couple of pages of Verilog code...
I doubt that those schematics survive though, as they predated the era of document control at Zilog.
Monte
Looks like it back to sqaure one then.. doing it myself. Too bad OpenCores doesn't have one. Maybe when I finish this one I can submit it and save other poor saps like me the trouble. :-D
-Adam
Adam, if I were you, I would contact Zilog. The Z8000 is their design, they probably have some legal rights (patents must be expired, since the Z8000 was introduced around 1980, but there may be copyrights etc that live much longer). The Z8000 had many fans, especially in the military markets. Maybe Zilog will help you, in order to help their frustrated Z8000 users. You never know. They may become your friend, and you definitely do not want them as your enemy... Peter Alfke (at Zilog only 1978-1980)
How would I be violating anything if I made a Z8000 equivalent design in Verilog/VHDL? I mean, if they had source for it, and I tweaked it slightly and called it my own, I can see where that crosses the line. But reverse engineering a design from its databook and creating a clone isn't copyright infringement from what I understand. What do you think?
-Adam
In the early 70's there was a company that built an early microprocessor, and gave it the Data General Nova instruction set ("it's popular, so why burden designers with another architecture?") Data General sued, I got dragged in as witness, and if I remember right, DG won. Too many lawyers, too few good engineers. My opinion. Peter Alfke
Shakespeare wrote in the Second Part of King Henry the Sixth, Act IV Scene 2:
CADE. 'I thank you, good people- there shall be no money; all shall eat and drink on my score, and I will apparel them all in one livery, that they may agree like brothers and worship me their lord.' DICK. 'The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.'
But isn't that how Intel was founded? Didn't they reverse engineer IBM's 8086 and create their own (or was it the 8080). In fact, IBM was making x86 equivalent CPUs for a while before they went full force with PPC. And then there's AMD who's still doing it.. etc..etc.
And also, if that were the case, I would also think that guys who write software emulators that emulate specific processors would also get hammered.
I'm only mimiking what's already been done:
Let me clarify: Intel developed and designed the 4004, then 8008, which evolved into the 8080. Then there ws the race to 16 bits: Intel 8086, Motorola
68000, and Zilog Z8000. Intel also made an economy-version of the 8086, called 8088 (8-bit bus insted of 16-bit), and IBM picked this intel 8088 for their PC. IBM was not in the commodity microprocessor business in those days, and IBM never manufactured 8086-like chips. And then there is the story how Bill Gates sold them an operating system that he was about to acquire...Facts can be stranger than fiction. Peter AlfkeLet me clarify: Intel developed and designed the 4004, then 8008, which evolved into the 8080. Then there ws the race to 16 bits: Intel 8086, Motorola
68000, and Zilog Z8000. Intel also made an economy-version of the 8086, called 8088 (8-bit bus insted of 16-bit), and IBM picked this intel 8088 for their PC. IBM was not in the commodity microprocessor business in those days, and IBM never manufactured 8086-like chips. And then there is the story how Bill Gates sold them an operating system that he was about to acquire...Facts can be stranger than fiction. Peter Alfke
What?! Are you on crack?
No. IBM used the Intel 8088 and later the 8086. Both were
100% Intel designs. IBM also evaluated the Motorola 68K family, but the 8-bit bus version wasn't going to be available in time.I don't remember hearing about that. Got any references?
Several vendors have made Intel-architecture compatible CPUs. All were either licensed from Intel or reverse engineered from Intel processors.
-- Grant Edwards grante@visi.com
"ajcrm125" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
-- rk, Just an OldEngineer "The number of people having any connection with the project must be
Utter nonsense. Intel developed the 4004, then the 8008, and the
8080 was an outgrowth of that. Intels primary business at the time was memory, including RAM and ePROMs. Their purpose in developing uCs was to expand their memory business. The 8086/8 were further developments of the 8080, and were licensed to AMD.At that time engineers had a lot more sense than they seem to today, and wouldn't consider designing in a sole-source part. Thus the license was a business necessity. The AMD license lasted through the 286, IIRC, after which AMD designed their own CPUs.
-- "If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
Someone reversed engineered something back in the day.. I just can't remember who. I'll do some digging.
Yep... me. :-) I work for IBM and back when I joined we were making
486's called "Blue Lightning"Reverese engineered.. there ya go. :-)
Interesting reading... this is not the case of reverse engineering I'm reffering to above, this is just another example: "While exactly copying a processor's microarchitecture would be illegal, creating a compatible product through the use of an original "clean room" design is legally protected. According to Halfhill, Intel clearly reverse-engineered AMD's products, a tactic AMD and other X86 chip designers have used to quickly catch up to Intel's historical leadership in the design of new microprocessors."
Ahhh... I think what I remember was the whole Compaq/IBM episode with Compaq reverse engineering the IBM BIOS. Although I do remember a TV show where an engineer was interview and he basically said "We had to go though every possible opcode and see figure out what it did so we could create a microprocessor that did the same thing". Man once you hit 30 your memory just aint what it used to be.....
Anywho.. seing as how I'm using 0% of the originla Z8000 microarchitecture (as non is documented) I should be all set.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.