Received: from PCH.mit.edu (18.7.21.50) by mail.efplus.com (192.168.0.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.485.1; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 09:52:11 -0700 Received: from PCH.MIT.EDU (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by PCH.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.8) with ESMTP id 096GgnJc008340; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 12:43:11 -0400 Received: from outgoing-exchange-7.mit.edu (OUTGOING-EXCHANGE-7.MIT.EDU [18.9.28.58]) by PCH.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.8) with ESMTP id 096GglBE008337 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 12:42:48 -0400 Received: from oc11exedge2.exchange.mit.edu (OC11EXEDGE2.EXCHANGE.MIT.EDU [18.9.3.18]) by outgoing-exchange-7.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 096Ggk5t008098 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 12:42:47 -0400 Received: from w92expo9.exchange.mit.edu (18.7.74.63) by oc11exedge2.exchange.mit.edu (18.9.3.18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1293.2; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 12:42:01 -0400 Received: from oc11exhyb8.exchange.mit.edu (18.9.1.113) by w92expo9.exchange.mit.edu (18.7.74.63) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1365.1; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 12:42:25 -0400 Received: from NAM12-BN8-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (104.47.55.169) by oc11exhyb8.exchange.mit.edu (18.9.1.113) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 12:42:25 -0400 Received: from DM5PR07CA0116.namprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:4:ae::45) by BYAPR01MB4615.prod.exchangelabs.com (2603:10b6:a03:91::31) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3455.21; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 16:42:23 +0000 Received: from DM3NAM03FT030.eop-NAM03.prod.protection.outlook.com (2603:10b6:4:ae:cafe::60) by DM5PR07CA0116.outlook.office365.com (2603:10b6:4:ae::45) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3433.36 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 16:42:23 +0000 Received: from elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net (209.86.89.61) by DM3NAM03FT030.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.82.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3433.34 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 16:42:23 +0000 Received: from [73.100.204.40] (helo=localhost.localdomain) by elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4) (envelope-from ) id 1kPq2g-00037W-37 for piclist@mit.edu; Tue, 06 Oct 2020 12:42:22 -0400 From: Dave Tweed To: "piclist@mit.edu" Sender: "piclist-bounces@mit.edu" Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2020 09:42:20 -0700 Subject: Re: [EE] Using a microcontroller as a peripheral? Thread-Topic: [EE] Using a microcontroller as a peripheral? Thread-Index: AdacAQlJV4G0joKURXqqRuGoW+j0Ow== Message-ID: <1601988140@dtweed.com> References: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Reply-To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Exchange-Organization-AuthAs: Anonymous X-MS-Exchange-Organization-AuthSource: TS500.efplus4.local X-MS-Has-Attach: X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-MS-Exchange-Organization-SenderIdResult: Pass X-MS-Exchange-Organization-PRD: mit.edu X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: received-spf: Fail (protection.outlook.com: domain of dtweed.com does not designate 209.86.89.61 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com; client-ip=209.86.89.61; helo=elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net; dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mitprod.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-mitprod-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=HsypGNdjlRJ2oHNUFMbOJKcmBVIkt3EttebKdaPu7cI=; b=gSnoRQ+ramaJBv8ahC+w2oMzfEQ7+GLAvWsAB2GpRl413IJ85OylEys3yp/TD8sib7IeMxX4C5zOitt6X309RWbb6vvWmFyGNeqyEuhS8uBvTqCXp+k9WGrLY7OrRd3OxMaXBpYCXLx0IOlHRPHwuBSqn6wHlVqkWD76UluaD0I= authentication-results: spf=fail (sender IP is 209.86.89.61) smtp.mailfrom=dtweed.com; mit.edu; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;mit.edu; dmarc=fail action=none header.from=dtweed.com; x-originating-ip: 73.100.204.40 errors-to: piclist-bounces@mit.edu list-id: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." list-post: x-beenthere: piclist@mit.edu x-mailman-version: 2.1.6 x-elnk-trace: 5507fdf0269a8d2672cc1e1b0924a179239a348a220c26093997dbcf12b0b3604e9ddcff6b00b898a7ce0e8f8d31aa3f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c x-topics: [EE] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 David VanHorn wrote: > One Hundred Microseconds?? Wow. How far we have come. I think that even back then, that was a purely hypothetical example. I don't think that there was ever any form of *electronic* memory that was that slow -- even magnetic core memory cycles in a few microseconds. The slowest chip memory I can think of (1702 EPROM) had an access time of 1 us. -- Dave Tweed --=20 http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .