80-Bus News


Spring 1985, Volume 4, Issue 1

Page 11 of 31

With the advent of high capacity disk systems, and the need to make the sectors larger, CP/M had a problem as physical sectors were no longer 128 bytes long. CP/M 2.2 introduced this idea called sector deblocking which overcomes the problem of different systems with different size sectors, at the same time leaving CP/M internally compatible with 128 byte sectors, which CP/M programs still use (compatibility between CP/M 1.4 and CP/M 2.2). CP/M now carries out a two stage disk access. Firstly it calculates the start of physical track/sector containing the 128 bytes it’s after. This n-length sector (512 bytes in the case of Gemini) is read into a work space called the deblocking buffer. Next CP/M calculates the place in the buffer where the 128 byte sector resides and copies it to the DMA address as if the 128 bytes came straight from the disk in a old CP/M system (or one which still uses physical 128 byte sectors).

The problem was I was reading and writing 128 byte logical ‘sectors’ (in inverted commas, as the Gemini physical sector size is 512 bytes). The process for one single 128 byte ‘sector’ goes like this:

READ (from Winnie) CP/M calculates the appropriate physical track/sector where the 128 bytes required are situated. Wait for that sector to appear (very fast as the Winnie controller probably knows where it is). Read in that physical sector to the deblocking buffer. Calculate the position of the 128 byte logical sector. Copy the 128 bytes required to the DMA area.

WRITE (to disk) CP/M calculates the appropriate 512 byte physical track/sector where the 128 bytes are going to go. Wait for that sector to appear (up to 198mS delay) Read that physical sector into the deblocking buffer. Now write the 128 byte logical sector from the DMA buffer into the deblocking buffer. Wait for the physical 512 byte sector to appear again (200mS delay) Write out the deblocking buffer to the 512 byte physical sector on the disk.

So you can see, there might be the best part of half a second between consecutive 128 byte sectors, and there’s an awful lot of 128 byte sectors in 650 odd K!! OK, so conversely, how come it worked so well between the Winnie and the RAM disk. Again, simple. In the case of the RAM disk, the thing is RAM, so no delays in waiting for sectors to come past, and it’s configured in 128 byte sectors anyway (I think). Just calculate the address and shove the data at it. The Winnie is less obvious. It’s all to do with the Xebec controller fitted. The real purpose of the Xebec is to act as a high speed interface between the Winnie which reels data in and out at mega-bits per second, and the computer which is quite pedestrian by comparison, only working in hundreds of kilo-bits per second. The Xebec contains a large RAM buffer for the Winnie to work in, so shovelling 128 bytes at a time is just like talking to a RAM disk. The Xebec’s own processors (two wierd dedicated things and a Z80) and RAM take over after the data has been captured, so again, no hanging about for sectors to appear in the right place before a read or write occurs.

So how could I speed up the Winnie to disk copy routine? Well the cause of the problem is this swapping of data about in the deblocking buffer. The deblocking logic is quite clever, although if you’ve read the source, quite messy. It knows not to flush the buffer if the same physical track/sector information is still current and no data write has been made to it. If a write to it has been made, then is still doesn’t write whilst the same physical track/sector remains current. However, as soon as the physical track/sector is changed, or the file is opened or closed, then the buffer is flushed if no writes were made, or written out then flushed if writes were made to it.

in a sequential read or write situation then, the deblocking knows what’s going on, so assuming that a write of a newly created sector was to be made, the 512 bytes of data is accumulated in the debiock buffer, and when complete, the whole physical sector is written out without any delay caused by reading in the sector and then writing it out. Likewise on a read, reading sequentially means that four 128 byte logical sectors are read into the deblock buffer and processed one at a time, the next read would be of the next 512 physical byte sector. (On a Nascom or Gemini the normal ‘skew’ of 2 allows this to happen efficiently.) So the answer would be not to read in 128 bytes then write it out again, but to read in at least 512 bytes and then to write it out again. In fact 512 bytes is not really enough. Better still to read in as much as possible into the TPA, say from the end of the copy program to the base to CCP, and then to write it out as a lump. This is how SWEEP or PIP work (have you Gemini MultiNet network owners noticed that PIP seems slower with the smaller TPA on the server using the 24K network system than when using the 64K normal system?).

I didn’t bother to do this with the ‘mini-PIP’ for transfering the indexes about, as the calculation of available TPA space and the complications of reading and writing buffer-fulis of data wasn’t worth the effort. Apart from that it meant more ‘decimalized’ POKE space within the dBASE program, making the thing more difficult to patch by

This is an OCR’d version of the scanned page and likely contains recognition errors.

Page 11 of 31