[net.micro] Is the 68K Overrated

tdl (10/19/82)

Here are a couple of random comments about the statements that Mike
Meyer made about the 68000.

I don't know what you mean by saying that the 68000 probably doesn't do
instruction decode in "hardware". Do you mean hardware as opposed
to microcode?  The 68000 does have two instruction decode
PLAs which generate starting addresses for the microsequences needed
to implement the instruction. (Each instruction can be composed of
up to 3 microsequences.) This instruction decode is always overlapped
with the execution of the previous instruction; effectively, no time
is spent on instruction decode.
Second, the 68000 does have what Motorola calls nanocode. In early designs
(speculation) they had a two level micro code similar to nanodata except
that the nanorom sequences were all one cycle long. (i.e. the nanorom
just does a decode of the microrom output) They patented a control structure
that looks like this.  I assume that they found that the feedback path
from control to the datapath and back was too slow, and then came up with
the current structure.
The current structure looks like a two level microcode, but it's really
only a one level microcode with a cute trick to save on the # of ROM
bits needed. They use the same address field to address both the micro
and nano ROMs. The decoder for the nanorom does not fully decode the 
address; therefore more than one address maps into a given word in
the ROM. The micro rom contains all information on control flow
while the nanorom contains all info to drive the datapath. They save
bits because nanowords are not duplicated they way they would be if it
was all one rom. This scheme does complicate the assignment of addresses
in the microrom. (The microrom has about 550 words while the nanorom
has about 350 words.)
				Tom Lovett
				houxh!tdl

P.S. By the way, what is a BLT stlye Iset?