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.