Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!dptcdc!torsqnt!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!sun-barr!newstop!sun!kilowatt!raz From: raz%kilowatt@Sun.COM (Steve -Raz- Berry) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: DTACK* or not to DTACK*, that is my question... Message-ID: <120845@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> Date: 11 Aug 89 00:10:19 GMT References: <120525@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <7617@cbmvax.UUCP> Sender: news@sun.Eng.Sun.COM Reply-To: raz@sun.UUCP (Steve -Raz- Berry) Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View Lines: 20 In article <7617@cbmvax.UUCP> daveh@cbmvax.UUCP (Dave Haynie) writes: >Clock high to FC/Address is just a different spec than FC/Address to AS*. >OK, it's been awhile since I looked at the 68000 spec, but certainly on >68030s, FC and Address are the same thing, timing wise. Since function >codes are really an extension of the Address, you wouldn't expect them to >act any differently than the Addresses do, eh? No, that's the kicker. Any more like that just hanging around waiting to bite me? >Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Systems Engineering) "The Crew That Never Rests" > {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: D-DAVE H BIX: hazy Back to the timing diagrams... --- Steve -Raz- Berry Disclaimer: It wasn't me! I was volatilizing my esters. UUCP: sun!kilowatt!raz ARPA: raz%kilowatt.EBay@sun.com KILOWATT: sun!kilowatt!archive-server archive-server%kilowatt.EBay@sun.com