Re: Caught by cache?

Article View: demon.tech.pc

Article #69049

#69049

From: Marcus Bainbridge
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 00:00

13 lines
990 bytes

John Naismith <John@naismith.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>No they're not. Whoever told you that this was the cache didn't know what they 
>were talking about. They are the cache *controllers*.

Crap.  The cache controller is built into the PCIset.  Write-back is a
function of the cache controller, but it doesn't take two chips to
implement it.  It does, however, take two SRAM chips to make 64-bit
cache.  Or QFP mouldings in this case...

-- 
Marcus Bainbridge 
marcus@mwb.u-net.com - http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/3429

Technical Details

Message-ID: <61gucDAfVUcxEw5c@mwb.u-net.com>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail

References: <415183800wnr@draycot.demon.co.uk>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1036bc,7858595a79b6a65d,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid1036bc,public
From: Marcus Bainbridge <marcus@mwb.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Caught by cache?
Date: 1996/04/14
Message-ID: <61gucDAfVUcxEw5c@mwb.u-net.com>
X-Deja-AN: 147450515
distribution: world
references: <415183800wnr@draycot.demon.co.uk>
organization: Sweeping Generalisations Inc.
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: demon.tech.pc

Reply to Parent Message