🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <9k3oan$t35$1...@top.mitre.org>, jcmo...@mitre.org wrote:

>John, I think I'll disagree with you here; my recollection (not parity-
>checked!) is that TS was part of the original design.  It certainly
>was in the original PoO that I worked with in the mid-'60s, although
>I do recall at the time being unable to find anyone who could produce
>a credible suggestion for any siuation in which it could be used.

I remember using TS for inter-partition locking in DOS/360, which had
no equivalent of ENQ/DEQ (mutex, in non-OS/360-speak).

I always assumed TS was part of the S/360 definition at the start, but
just noticed that there's no TS (X'93') in the opcode table published
in an early journal paper about S/360:

  G. M. Amdahl, G. A. Blaauw, F. P. Brooks, Jr., "Architecture of the
  IBM System/360", IBM Journal of R and D, 8:2, 1964, pp. 32-34.

There's a scanned PDF of this paper (reprinted in IBM JR&D 44:1-2) at

  http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/rd/441/amdahl.pdf

But TS is in an instruction table in an IBM Systems Journal article by
two of the same authors (Blauuw and Brooks), also published in 1964.

Since the first 360 customer shipment was a year after the April 1964
announcement, evidently the TS addition to the architecture happenned
after announcement but before any customers got their hands on a
machine.

How soon after announcment was the first rev of the PoO published?

- Jim Saum