1 Jul
2016
1 Jul
'16
1:59 a.m.
Dan Cross <crossd(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Still, the point that the 68451 MMU was pretty lame is
well taken. The
segment table was too small (96 entries?) and it was clearly designed to
support segmented memory rather than paging. It is inadequate to the latter
task. The 68851 available for the 68020 got it right; supposedly this could
be used with the 68010 as well, but I don't know that anyone ever tried
that in a real product.
We at H.Berthold AG in Berlin did manage to use 12 68451 in parallel for our
virtual UNOS variant.
Jörg
--
EMail:joerg@schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
joerg.schilling(a)fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/'