Re: [hatari-devel] Emulation of the TT second MFP |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/hatari-devel Archives
]
- To: hatari-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [hatari-devel] Emulation of the TT second MFP
- From: Uwe Seimet <Uwe.Seimet@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 6 May 2019 19:14:57 +0200
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1557162897; 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=iDa/XCKNADQBv5ZVZsmHpDvFM4/sTAJt1BvkW0f5PMo=; b=QKImt05IjFtdnQXImVuc4Ni9cer69ZQJm7FyoyXiHSQ1sm6RH0pE5YE2A32icctjBE oXySpelMpwiFKSNHIcuBWSUD6tyZKQtU2N7JPZ8TQfCocyYurdPBVGvuPeBr7nx+l1pI T/jFJ2nc4pgTILyssB4l4NaoCqBZrRvx1LjzsQtKfCKuaAAjOH+SmWZ7d7wTGTiMCvL8 6xmvxo3uhfwA7e//kTYeIFAn7k4KvUKyj71GL0ZliIFcbW3Nh3s1Slg2hpZY56yiqD5h XufHd+uQmLHpXWdfMbpiXSNwcf7Aoh5JDh9/YwCFNLf+aEsZdyaQLwWX1l5klu0AbLOb Hn+g==
By the way, before the crash Hatari reports this:
WARN : Write to unimplemented RTC/NVRAM interrupt enable bits 0x40
> Hi,
>
> I don't think that we may assume that FFFFFA13 is directly related to the
> exception. The error message does not say so. A0 may just happen to
> contain FFFFFA13. Most likely vector=0x1C means that the exception
> resulted from a TRAPV, which is consistent with the "trap type 28"
> message.
> The SR content is 0x2000, though, i.e. V is *not* set. In theory the
> error dump should contain the register contents at the time the
> exception occured, so V should be set. I wonder whether TRAPV is emulated
> correctly. I guess TRAPV is hardly ever used, so nobody might have
> noticed issues with it yet.
>
> Best regards
>
> Uwe
>
> > Le 06/05/2019 à 18:02, Uwe Seimet a écrit :
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Interesting news. I just checked the behavior of ASV, which appears to get a
> > > bit further in the boot process now. There is an exception, though, please
> > > see the attached screenshot.
> > >
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > hard to tell what went wrong with this screenshot (and I don't know ASV
> > that much) ; strange thing is that A0=FFFFFA13 in that dump, which would
> > mean it was an access to main MFP whose behaviour was not modified
> > (hopefully). But it's not sure the faulty access was made on this
> > address, one would need to see the corresponding asm code.
> >
> > Nicolas
> >
> >
> >
>
>