Re: [hatari-devel] VBR as a breakpoint condition

[Eero Tamminen <oak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

On 09/13/2018 11:51 PM, Nicolas Pomarède wrote:
> Le 13/09/2018 à 22:47, Eero Tamminen a écrit :
> > On 09/08/2018 11:12 PM, Nicolas Pomarède wrote:
> > > Le 08/09/2018 à 21:37, Eero Tamminen a écrit :
> > > > I've commited this support with 020+ check.
> > >
> > > there's a small error in your regs_000[] : there's no ISP in the 
> > > 68000, only SSP and USP (SSP became ISP/MSP in 68020+)
> > >
> > > So, 68000 should have USP and SSP ; 68020+ should have USP, ISP and MSP.
> >
> > I'm using WinUAE CPU register naming, in the WinUAE register dump
> > (and sources), there's no SSP for 000, only USP & ISP.

I can do that, if you fix the register name in the CPU core
register dump. :-)

(I don't want debugger "register" command to use different
register name depending on whether it shows register's value
or sets it.)


	- Eero

> I think that toni "merged" the different names in a single one to avoid 
> too much variables, but if you look at 68000 user manual, you will see 
> that there's no ISP in 68000, so I think it would be better to use the 
> 68000's naming, even if the corresponding variable is different.
>
> >  From the WinUAE sources I also noticed that DFC, SFC & VBR are
> > already in 010+, but as there are no Atari machines with 68010,
> > I don't think it matters if debugger reg matching misses them
> > for 010.
>
> yes, 68010 was some kind of "in between" cpu, some 68020 concepts were 
> introduced there, but not all of them. as you say, it shouldn't matter 
> as there was no 68010 atari machines.
>
> Nicolas
>
>
> >      - Eero