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