|Re: [hatari-devel] FPU detection, who is wrong?|
[ Thread Index |
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/hatari-devel Archives
- To: "hatari-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <hatari-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [hatari-devel] FPU detection, who is wrong?
- From: Thorsten Otto <halgara@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 04:22:56 +0000 (UTC)
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.de; s=s2048; t=1424146978; bh=MUB6YniCBt3W+wYIWSvOXDIae0VNlANmcEJ6CTCWb7s=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From:Subject; b=sljp4K7PPDEh6D7tEe+x7+qcrTgZCW5S+xIsIEP1UMf2utYDy5/jDtjjxNupnDdEEg2LXU80ai3tNpxBViCC2PBmZuVXf1zdteKnskSuHgSWpkaGYVA7PQ5JCIT+T+0frrCPPhXITErmqVUHEggCaIEhR8CbP/lWO6/f93a0scqYQaG+C40WIfA49csaqB6BwHqO4inInCuIkETOCm3ZRSppDUs8+bqGIqJXnIhczd1FIFJ0m2rlP9zWIgDTwr1teI3fhRjOA2bDfSJphKC8jrbDFICO1vBWcNzKZOPC6LhtpdrAxO1vllMOdkavyqRnrzXz7pVbyzpuZ1KgJCTWog==
> I have no idea where those 2 values came from, they were there before I
> knew nothing about UAE and I assumed they were correct.
Seems to be clarified now. I can't see anything wrong with using 0x20 for the revision field, as long as the frame size field is set correctly. Looks like the detection code in MiNT is wrong. After all, it's a cosmetic change only, and i'm not sure wether there ever has been any Atari around with a 68881.
But thanks for answering.
Toni Wilen <twilen@xxxxxxxxxx> schrieb am 20:15 Montag, 16.Februar 2015:
I have no idea where those 2 values came from, they were there before I
knew nothing about UAE and I assumed they were correct.
I just tested what my 68030 based Amiga 3000 with 68882 returns, version
number = 0x1f. Unfortunately I don't have any 68881s.