Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 5 Aug 1997 15:30:36 -0700 (MST)
From:      Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
To:        ejs@bfd.com (Eric J. Schwertfeger)
Cc:        mal@kairos.algonet.se, current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Make this a relese coordinator decision (was Re: ports-current/packages-current discontinued)
Message-ID:  <199708052230.PAA06822@phaeton.artisoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970805142026.9281C-100000@harlie.bfd.com> from "Eric J. Schwertfeger" at Aug 5, 97 02:21:40 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > (*) Or was it _two_ of them? I have some faint memories they had to use
> >     two to make it work with a multi-process os.
> 
> If I remember right, the 68010 had a limitation that made it difficult to
> deal with page faults, so the second 68010's purpose was to take care of
> page faults, then let the primary 68010 continue.

Instruction restart was a problem on the 68010.  The second processor
ran one behind to handle the restart.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199708052230.PAA06822>