Article View: comp.sys.transputer
Article #2426MemWait or notMemWait
From: Nigel Mitchell
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1989 16:17
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1989 16:17
5 lines
691 bytes
691 bytes
In response to the question about MemWait. Either I have missed the point completely or we are talking about MemWait (and not notMemWait), ie it is active high. Some care must be taken about just when to assert/negate it but passing it through a D-typed clocked by ProcClockOut seems a pretty good idea.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<8901201617.aa20701@welly.gec-rl-hrc.co.uk>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ncis.llnl.gov!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ucbvax!gec-rl-hrc.co.uk!nigelShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ncis.llnl.gov!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ucbvax!gec-rl-hrc.co.uk!nigel From: nigel@gec-rl-hrc.co.uk (Nigel Mitchell) Newsgroups: comp.sys.transputer Subject: MemWait or notMemWait Message-ID: <8901201617.aa20701@welly.gec-rl-hrc.co.uk> Date: 20 Jan 89 16:17:13 GMT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 5