| Re: [hatari-devel] MEMWATCH freezes Hatari |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/hatari-devel Archives
]
- To: hatari-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [hatari-devel] MEMWATCH freezes Hatari
- From: Uwe Seimet <Uwe.Seimet@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 18:30:57 +0200
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1539707457; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=seimet.de; h=In-Reply-To:References:Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date: X-RZG-CLASS-ID:X-RZG-AUTH:From:Subject:Sender; bh=sjJV7GHSx6kbgqTYN0Y7VZ9i1hOiiqngqufdLeGSe1s=; b=YslVs4keEQLEVSDUV9LlCLUyrY/a4rUCFdWI3XyV3y6nl8kqZJN+4ngCbpjv4CZcDs tA89738htnHPp6KLkbJvtLfl1jZsAeL50TXCiI0SR6D6F2Du8LXb4RgocLttYEU8Xf1n kj8GCSCc1ENVvLKIA0wx392DaEItNCSdIFlUCZThJJCRXK4guwwIMsgBqSHhM6LqryGB qqgL0WjgQcrRro2qIpENj+RXBpnWhxekSs/mG7/rff6AFW2MntmsZj3bw6iuGIMqXYlZ AsTOzEfsiqctaqWWGmMAg5mcsqu7G8cXndKGmcscs0EcI4nmpuHl9WHzznM2XYysudx9 ka6A==
Hi,
> I couldn't find the meaning of a7+0x28 in the doc, it just says
> "internal registers, 2 words".
> Maybe that's here that the retry is not correctly validated ?
>
> So, should it be mmu030_opcode != -1 in m68k_run_mmu030 ?
> If I use a "!= -1", the instruction at 1e274 is correctly retried, but I
> don't know if this is the proper fix.
In my opinion everything that is said to be internal in the specs
can/should be ignored by the emulation. It cannot have any meaning for
the application using the PMMU, provided that the application does not
use any undocumented content in these fields. (MEMWATCH, OUTSIDE etc.
do not make any use of something that's marked as internal.)
Best regards
Uwe