home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!think.com!news!jcallen
- From: jcallen@marley.think.com (Jerry Callen)
- Newsgroups: comp.arch
- Subject: Re: CISC Microcode (was Re: RISC Mainframe)
- Date: 24 Jul 92 13:21:52
- Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
- Lines: 21
- Message-ID: <JCALLEN.92Jul24132152@marley.think.com>
- References: <9207081402.AA25575@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
- <GLEW.92Jul12214745@pdx117.intel.com> <BrE09F.4JK@metaflow.com>
- <1992Jul15.163217.434@urbana.mcd.mot.com> <BrM813.Du5@zoo.toronto.edu>
- <GLEW.92Jul23184629@pdx007.intel.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: marley.think.com
- In-reply-to: glew@pdx007.intel.com's message of Fri, 24 Jul 1992 02:46:29 GMT
-
- In article <GLEW.92Jul23184629@pdx007.intel.com> glew@pdx007.intel.com (Andy Glew) writes:
-
- By the way: creating virtual address aliases with different cache
- properties is a recipe for a complicated, expensive, and lower
- performance than it should be multilevel cache system.
-
- How so? Since the R4000 uses a completely separate bus for the
- secondary cache, I don't see the complication. Uncached access
- go straight to the main memory bus; otherwise the usual cache
- lookup takes place. What am I missing?
-
- -- Jerry Callen
- jcallen@world.std.com (preferred)
- jcallen@think.com (OK, too)
- {uunet,harvard}!think!jcallen (if you must)
-
- --
- -- Jerry Callen
- jcallen@world.std.com (preferred)
- jcallen@think.com (OK, too)
- {uunet,harvard}!think!jcallen (if you must)
-