Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!helios.ee.lbl.gov!lbl.gov!jnmoyne
From: jnmoyne@lbl.gov (Jean-Noel MOYNE)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Whats wrong with self Modifying Code?
Message-ID: <6180@helios.ee.lbl.gov>
Date: 13 Jul 90 23:34:35 GMT
Sender: usenet@helios.ee.lbl.gov
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
Lines: 10
X-Local-Date: 13 Jul 90 16:34:35 PDT
References:<24379@snow-white.udel.EDU> <6171@helios.ee.lbl.gov> <14280@venera.isi.edu>

In article <14280@venera.isi.edu> rod@venera.isi.edu (Rodney Doyle Van 
Meter III) writes:
>  A cache
> flush might be okay, if it takes less than 50 milliseconds or so.
> Simply turning the caches off is unlikely to be an acceptable solution.

     So this is simple calculation: the 68030 built-in caches are 256 
bytes big (as I remember). But if you take the 68040, it's another story 
as they are 4 Kbytes big (quote me if I'm wrong, I'm not completly sure 
(-:)