3 ms·

Have an Amiga w/ 060, and that instruction doesn't seem to modify any A registers. (Only did a very quick test of those exact instruction words)

by mras0 2y ago

basementcat 2y ago
I appreciate that I can ask an esoteric question about the behavior of a 30 year old microprocessor and multiple people respond with test results on actual hardware within a few hours. Can y'all also post the mask revision (if known) and whether it is an EC or LC device? (In case it impacts behavior)
- mras0 2y ago
  Rev5 "full" 060 (not EC/LC). Quick capture of crappy methodology: https://imgur.com/a/XwQ1Tnp https://imgur.com/a/XwQ1Tnp (PCR with revision number is in d0)
  - ahefner 2y ago
    Today by, way of your screenshot, I discover Asm-Pro. Just got into Amiga recently (by way of receiving one from my uncle's closet..) and have been meaning to backfill my shameful lack of 68k asm knowledge. Thanks!
    - snvzz 2y ago
      Asm-Pro is a modern, maintained, feature-rich asmone derivative. Another modern/maintained one, focusing on low end 68000/68010 machines, is asmtwo. AsmOne was a very popular assembler at the time, and has seen a few derivatives. I remember an old one called trash'm'one.
    - mras0 2y ago
      Good luck! As the sibling comment mentions, Asm-Pro is IMO a good choice these though it requires KSv2+ (so you can't use it on an stock A500). I mostly use vasm for "larger" stuff though (http://sun.hasenbraten.de/vasm/ http://sun.hasenbraten.de/vasm/) and cross-compile (though it can run on Amiga as well) / test in an emulator. For a quick test/code loop nothing beats the Asm-* family - remember to save often and make backups though :)
  - mras0 2y ago
    Update: a1=-1 is a bad choice of test value (0 is much better), as it won't show the issue if present! However, it doesn't change the outcome of the test on 060, but I would have noticed that 020 is affected as well (as also mentioned in the comments to the article).
- dougg3 2y ago
  My test of an 040 (no A1 change, D1 changed) was on a chip with the following markings: XC68LC040RC25B 02E23G QEDP9348D MALAYSIA

Have an Amiga w/ 060, and that instruction doesn't seem to modify any A registers. (Only did a very quick test of those exact instruction words)

by mras0 2y ago

Have an Amiga w/ 060, and that instruction doesn't seem to modify any A registers. (Only did a very quick test of those exact instruction words)

basementcat 2y ago

I appreciate that I can ask an esoteric question about the behavior of a 30 year old microprocessor and multiple people respond with test results on actual hardware within a few hours. Can y'all also post the mask revision (if known) and whether it is an EC or LC device? (In case it impacts behavior)

mras0 2y ago
Rev5 "full" 060 (not EC/LC). Quick capture of crappy methodology: https://imgur.com/a/XwQ1Tnp https://imgur.com/a/XwQ1Tnp (PCR with revision number is in d0)
- ahefner 2y ago
  Today by, way of your screenshot, I discover Asm-Pro. Just got into Amiga recently (by way of receiving one from my uncle's closet..) and have been meaning to backfill my shameful lack of 68k asm knowledge. Thanks!
  - snvzz 2y ago
    Asm-Pro is a modern, maintained, feature-rich asmone derivative. Another modern/maintained one, focusing on low end 68000/68010 machines, is asmtwo. AsmOne was a very popular assembler at the time, and has seen a few derivatives. I remember an old one called trash'm'one.
  - mras0 2y ago
    Good luck! As the sibling comment mentions, Asm-Pro is IMO a good choice these though it requires KSv2+ (so you can't use it on an stock A500). I mostly use vasm for "larger" stuff though (http://sun.hasenbraten.de/vasm/ http://sun.hasenbraten.de/vasm/) and cross-compile (though it can run on Amiga as well) / test in an emulator. For a quick test/code loop nothing beats the Asm-* family - remember to save often and make backups though :)
- mras0 2y ago
  Update: a1=-1 is a bad choice of test value (0 is much better), as it won't show the issue if present! However, it doesn't change the outcome of the test on 060, but I would have noticed that 020 is affected as well (as also mentioned in the comments to the article).
dougg3 2y ago
My test of an 040 (no A1 change, D1 changed) was on a chip with the following markings: XC68LC040RC25B 02E23G QEDP9348D MALAYSIA