From owner-freebsd-hardware Fri Jul 11 21:35:37 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id VAA19084 for hardware-outgoing; Fri, 11 Jul 1997 21:35:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Ilsa.StevesCafe.com (Ilsa.StevesCafe.com [205.168.119.129]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA19079 for ; Fri, 11 Jul 1997 21:35:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Ilsa.StevesCafe.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Ilsa.StevesCafe.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA10483; Fri, 11 Jul 1997 22:34:28 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <199707120434.WAA10483@Ilsa.StevesCafe.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0gamma 1/27/96 From: Steve Passe To: Michael Smith cc: rminnich@Sarnoff.COM (Ron G. Minnich), deischen@iworks.InterWorks.org, freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: I2O only available under NDA? In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 12 Jul 1997 11:18:13 +0930." <199707120148.LAA27296@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 11 Jul 1997 22:34:28 -0600 Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Hi, > One has to ask "how?". It strikes me that the extra software layers > and the implicit serialisation involved in using a coprocessor will > only _worsen_ the overall performance of the system. What I _don't_ > see in their architecture are things like extra buffering DMA > controllers, a decent PIC, etc., all of which would help drag the PC ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I thought I saw somewhere that the i960 uses the APIC. As someone who has been programming the APIC extensively, I wouldn't call it 'great' (or even 'good' based on my problems this week...), it is definatley better than the 8259 PIC nonsense... Having said this, I would like to be on record as NOT supporting the I20 NDA pucky. -- Steve Passe | powered by smp@csn.net | Symmetric MultiProcessor FreeBSD