🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <5668@inmos.co.uk (Michael Winser) writes:
>In article <279@inmos.co.uk (Jim Hutchison) writes:
>>Has anyone seen/heard of an architecture which aided kernel message passing by
>>supplying hardware message queues for *fast* message queueing and dequeueing?
>
>The transputer, I believe.
>

Well, no actually. The transputer does have fast mesage passing and
scheduling but is has NO message queues. The model of message passing
implemented is that of CSP, processes synchronise when they pass messages; if
the receiver is not ready to receieve when the sender sends, the sender
suspends. If the sender is not ready when the receiver wants to receive
the receiever suspends. This model is supported, not only for processes
running on the same transputer, but also for processes running on
distinct transputers joined by trasputer links. 

The choice of synchronised message passing has many advantages both to
the implementor and to the user. One advantage is that it eliminates
the need for message queues (and hence message buffers) to be associated
with every communication channel. If another style of message passing is
required it can normally built from the process and message passing
primitives in the machine.  

A fuller discussion of the issues here can be found in 

	Communicating process architecture
        INMOS Ltd
	Pub: Prentice Hall
	ISBN 0-13-629320-4


Roger Shepherd, INMOS Ltd   JANET:    roger@uk.co.inmos 
1000 Aztec West             UUCP:     ukc!inmos!roger or uunet!inmos-c!roger
Almondsbury                 INTERNET: @col.hp.com:roger@inmos-c
+44 454 616616              ROW:      roger@inmos.co.uk