Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bbn!uwmcsd1!ig!agate!ucbvax!decwrl!purdue!i.cc.purdue.edu!j.cc.purdue.edu!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!urbsdc!aglew From: aglew@urbsdc.Urbana.Gould.COM Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: virtual cache coherency Message-ID: <28200142@urbsdc> Date: 9 May 88 19:27:00 GMT References: <1605@pt.cs.cmu.edu> Lines: 11 Nf-ID: #R:pt.cs.cmu.edu:1605:urbsdc:28200142:000:489 Nf-From: urbsdc.Urbana.Gould.COM!aglew May 9 14:27:00 1988 >Which brings up the question, why don't we do IO with virtual addresses? >We have living proof that it can be done. Why isn't it catching on? > > Don lindsay@k.gp.cs.cmu.edu CMU Computer Science Gould's NP1 UIOM (Universal I/O Module) can do I/O using I/O Command Blocks containing virtual addresses. I don't know if the OS is using it at the moment (not my department, sorry), but the prospect of using it to do I/O to dedicated devices without much OS intervention is attractive.