Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unmvax!ncar!noao!asuvax!mcdphx!teroach.UUCP!dbk
From: dbk@teroach.UUCP (Dave Kinzer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: Official Warnings...
Summary: More stuff that belongs elsewhere...
Keywords: tas
Message-ID: <10819@mcdphx.phx.mcd.mot.com>
Date: 30 Apr 89 18:48:11 GMT
References: <3082@haven.umd.edu> <11394@well.UUCP> <3773@sugar.hackercorp.com>
Sender: listen@mcdphx.phx.mcd.mot.com
Reply-To: dbk@teroach.UUCP (Dave Kinzer)
Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Distribution: na
Organization: Motorola Microcomputer Division, Tempe, Az.
Lines: 22

In article <3773@sugar.hackercorp.com> karl@sugar.hackercorp.com (Karl Lehenbauer) writes:
>
>Isn't TAS useful on a single CPU system, though, for providing fast,
>uninterruptable test and set for use as a semaphore, without having 
>to turn off interrupts?
>
>-- uunet!sugar!karl  | "Nobody hipped me to that, dude." -- Pee Wee
>-- Usenet BBS (713) 438-5018

   Semaphore to who?  Another task?   That's what the operating system is
in there for.  It takes care of all the system dependent stuff.  

   I think (really) that this whole discussion boils down to:  The TAS
instruction should not be used in an Amiga because it has a problem with
the custom chips.  YOU WERE WARNED!  That's it, end of any discussion
appropriate to this newsgroup.

#define Net_police_mode OFF

|    // GOATS - Gladly Offering All Their Support  Dave Kinzer (602)897-3085|
|   //  >> In Hell you need 4Mb to Multitask!  <<  uunet!mcdphx!teroach!dbk |
| \X/   #define policy_maker(name) (name->salary > 3 * dave.salary)         |