Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!oscsuna.osc.edu!pixelpump.osc.edu!stein
From: stein@pixelpump.osc.edu (Rick 'Transputer' Stein)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: DMA on RISC-based systems
Message-ID: <209@oscsuna.osc.edu>
Date: 7 Jun 89 16:07:26 GMT
References: <46500067@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> <181@dg.dg.com> <1989May31.163057.543@utzoo.uucp> <3480@orca.WV.TEK.COM> <185@dg.dg.com> <620@biar.UUCP> <41042@bbn.COM>
Sender: news@oscsuna.osc.edu
Reply-To: stein@pixelpump.UUCP (Rick 'Transputer' Stein)
Organization: Ohio Supercomputer Center
Lines: 20

In article <41042@bbn.COM> slackey@BBN.COM (Stan Lackey) writes:
>2) This discussion brings to mind one that went around some time ago, 
>   which was, is it better to supply a bunch of specialized processors
>   (then bitblt's, now including DMA controllers), or a bunch of identical
>   processors connected together?  Theory was, when the bitblt and DMA are
>   done, the other processor(s) can be applied to a compute bound task.
>   It seems to me this might make an interesting product; price/perf
>   range is varied by the number of [identical] processors, and all I/O
>   hardware is very very dumb.
>
>-Stan

This sure sounds like an physically objective parallel i/o mechanism.
A processor controlling some portion of the i/o stream as mapped to
a specific device.  Sounds like a job for Transputer Man! :-).
-=-
Richard M. Stein (aka Rick 'Transputer' Stein)
Concurrent Software Specialist @ The Ohio Supercomputer Center
Ghettoblaster vacuum cleaner architect and Trollius semi-guru
Internet: stein@pixelpump.osc.edu, Ma Bell Net: 614-292-4122