Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!ptsfa!well!tenney
From: tenney@well.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: 68k word-alignment penalty?
Message-ID: <2833@well.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 27-Mar-87 02:20:25 EST
Article-I.D.: well.2833
Posted: Fri Mar 27 02:20:25 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 28-Mar-87 07:47:29 EST
References: <8703242106.AA05032@cory.Berkeley.EDU>
Reply-To: tenney@well.UUCP (Glenn S. Tenney)
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA
Lines: 13
Summary: not possible

I've been waiting for someone that knows the details to post an 
answer, but seeing none here goes:  Sorry, but there is no way
that an interrupt routine can recover from such a trap!  Long
ago, it was discovered that when a byte address was used on a
mem-write, the byte after the one in question would be trashed
before the trap was taken.  That is my recollection, perhaps it
was on a read too, but that wouldn't make sense.  Doesn't anyone
else remember the exact situation?
-- Glenn Tenney 
UUCP: {hplabs,glacier,lll-crg,ihnp4!ptsfa}!well!tenney
ARPA: well!tenney@LLL-CRG.ARPA        Delphi and MCI Mail: TENNEY
As Alphonso Bodoya would say... (tnx boulton)
Disclaimers? DISCLAIMERS!? I don' gotta show you no stinking DISCLAIMERS!