Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!dali.cs.montana.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!ucbvax!dog.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!manta!norton
From: norton@manta.NOSC.MIL (Scott Norton)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Subject: Re: WorkBench 2.0
Summary: If ROM image isn't relocatable, what about 32-bit RAM sys routines?
Message-ID: <1938@manta.NOSC.MIL>
Date: 24 Apr 91 22:15:13 GMT
References: <20515@cbmvax.commodore.com> <cwN9Z5w164w@graphics.rent.com> <20890@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Organization: Space & Naval Warfare Systems Command
Lines: 14

In article <20890@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes:
>
>That special place in fast RAM is, thanks to MMU magic, exactly the same place
>ROMs live.  ROM code is not relocatable.  

What impact does this restriction have on moving ROM routines to 32-bit
wide memory on machines that have it?  I had read that system performance
really peps up when something like layers.library is executing out
of 50 Mhz, 32-bit wide RAM.

I would hope that the non-relocatable stuff is startup code or other
mystical OS secrets, and not shared system libraries.

LT Scott Norton   <norton@NOSC.MIL>