home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!unixhub!kinetics.slac.stanford.edu!user
- From: dbg@slacvm.slac.stanford.edu (David Gustavson)
- Newsgroups: comp.arch
- Subject: Re: what is a non-split transaction bus called?
- Message-ID: <dbg-270792201001@kinetics.slac.stanford.edu>
- Date: 28 Jul 92 03:07:25 GMT
- References: <1992Jul24.011046.12931@beaver.cs.washington.edu>
- Sender: news@unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU
- Followup-To: comp.arch
- Distribution: na
- Organization: SLAC
- Lines: 21
- Nntp-Posting-Host: 134.79.17.25
-
- In article <1992Jul24.011046.12931@beaver.cs.washington.edu>,
- noah@cs.washington.edu (Rick Noah Zucker) wrote:
- >
- >
- > I was writing something and wanted to refer to a bus that did
- > not use split-transactions. I realized that I did not know the adjective
- > for such a bus. One person I asked locally said, "That's simply a bus.
- > If it is split-transaction, then you need to say so". Someone else said
- > she uses the term "hold the bus" protocol, but admitted that that is not
- > a technical term. I have seen the term continuous connect used, but
- > thought that there must be something better. What do you call it?
- >
- The IEEE standards seem to be adopting "unified transactions" for those
- that are not split, at least in an environment that permits both kinds.
-
- --------------------------------------------------------------
- -- David B. Gustavson, Computation Research Group, SLAC, POB 4349 MS 88,
- Stanford, CA 94309 tel (415)926-2863 fax (415)961-3530
- -- What the world needs next is a Scalable Coherent Interface!
- -- Any opinions expressed are mine and not necessarily those
- of the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, the University, or the DOE.
-