Re: 2200 Immediate indexed operands ( 3 questions ).
- From: "Kurt Duncan" <someone@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2011 11:35:24 -0500
cause indirect addressing (since, in this case F0.x <> 0, the h and I bits do not extend F0.u, and we do - I presume - do index incrementation)?
"Vlad_Inhaler" wrote in message news:c8360b8f-5b87-427b-9632-64cc5897e4c4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Aug 26, 5:42 am, "Kurt Duncan" <some...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Suppose I have something like
I *think* the PRM says we're going to sign-extend that value.
That means A5 will be loaded with 0777777400000. Right?
( with F0.x == 0, the operand is F0.h, F0.I, and F0.u -- 18 bits )
But my questions still stand...
FLIT is my friend
TRACE OF ACTIVITY: 'ACT001' (TRACE ID 01)
400004001000 LX,U X2,0200000
400004001001 LA,XU A4,0400000
400004001002 LA,XU A5,0177776,X2
400004001003 ER EXIT$
ACT001 ER EXIT$
(I substituted A4 from A5 in one case)
- Prev by Date: Bob Richards
- Next by Date: Re: WFL usercodes
- Previous by thread: Bob Richards
- Next by thread: Re: WFL usercodes