Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > comp.arch > #5683

Re: 4- and 5-operand instructions

Message-ID <4F2C1B20.1D2ED4DD@sonic.net> (permalink)
Date 2012-02-03 09:36 -0800
From Mark Thorson <nospam@sonic.net>
Organization none
Newsgroups comp.arch
Subject Re: 4- and 5-operand instructions
References <ggtgp-8D1AEA.03180231012012@netnews.mchsi.com> <jgeu27$9rg$1@dont-email.me> <4F2B3885.3D2BB9F2@sonic.net> <vjcsv8-3nn1.ln1@ntp6.tmsw.no>

Show all headers | View raw

Terje Mathisen wrote:
> 
> Code density/decode bandwidth would also be impacted by the fact that in
> order to specify such instructions you would need a _lot_ of opcode
> bits, as well as allowing at least two of the operands to come from memory.

You could restrict the generality and rely on
the compiler to anticipate using the instruction
and maneuver the operands into the right registers
before the CISCy instruction.

> OTOH we do have instructions very similar to what you're asking for
> already, in the form of short vector operations: You just need to make
> sure that B and D (both double?) are stored in a single vector reg, with
> C and E coming from either another vector reg, or from a 16-byte aligned
> memory address.

That's one way to do it.

> I.e. you have to give up generalized addressing in order to reduce the
> number of register/memory opcode bits, sort of like some cpus that had
> instructions using sequential pairs of registers for double-wide operations.

There's other ways to do it.  You could have the
operand specifiers in registers and load them
in the set-up for a loop.  Then, you could afford
to add autoincrement and autodecrement bits.  And
maybe a skip-on-bounds bit for automatically dropping
out of a loop without spending any loop instructions
on bounds checking.

If you wanted to get fancy, there could be a loop
termination condition register for specifying
termination conditions other than hitting a bound,
for example if you were searching for a bit pattern.

This moves a lot of the bits (normally expressed in
the instruction stream for a loop) out of the loop.
The bits for specifying how pointers are managed
and how the loop is terminated are fed to the CPU
once during loop set-up, rather than being fed to
the CPU repeatedly for each loop iteration.

If we're feeling particularly fiendish, we could
have multiple sets of specifier registers.  If the
CISCy instruction contained no operand or termination
specifiers in the opcode, there would be room for
a bit or a small bit field for selecting the specifier
register set.  ABCDEF0 would use set 0, ABCDEF1 would
use set 1, etc.  By moving all of the specifiers
except this one out of the opcode, the opcode space
consumed by the ABCDEFx instructions is quite small.
That's what allows us to implement a comprehensive set
of 4- and 5-operand instructions, like ABDEFx, ABCEFx,
etc.

Back to comp.arch | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-01-31 03:18 -0600
  Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-01-31 15:49 +0000
    Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-01-31 09:48 -0800
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-01-31 22:20 +0000
  Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-01-31 10:15 -0800
    Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-03 15:49 +0000
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-03 12:44 -0800
  Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-01 12:49 +0000
    Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-01 08:02 -0800
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more sarr.blumson@alum.dartmouth.org - 2012-02-01 16:18 +0000
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-01 16:53 +0000
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2012-02-01 12:54 -0700
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-02 21:01 -0600
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-02 16:41 +0000
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-02 22:47 +0000
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-02-03 14:57 +0000
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-03 10:21 -0800
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-03 10:25 -0800
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-03 12:48 -0800
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-07 12:02 -0500
              Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-07 13:07 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-07 14:58 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-07 17:25 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-07 22:42 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brian Drummond <brian@shapes.demon.co.uk> - 2012-02-08 10:31 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-08 14:12 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-02-08 14:00 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-09 11:45 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-08 13:25 -0600
              Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-07 14:21 -0600
    Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2012-02-02 16:46 -0500
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-03 16:00 +0000
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-02-03 16:12 +0000
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-03 17:19 +0000
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-02-03 17:25 +0000
  Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-02-01 05:31 -0800
  Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-01 10:21 -0800
    Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-01 19:16 +0000
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-01 13:34 -0600
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-07 17:08 -0500
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-02-01 14:50 -0500
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-02 02:07 -0600
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Piotr Wyderski <peter.pan@neverland.mil> - 2012-02-06 10:50 +0100
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-02 12:30 -0800
    Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-02 02:03 -0600
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nospam@ab-katrinedal.dk (Niels Jørgen Kruse) - 2012-02-02 16:15 +0100
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-02 20:53 -0600
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2012-02-02 11:16 -0700
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-02 23:10 -0600
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2012-02-02 23:54 -0700
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-12 11:42 -0600
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Chris Gray <cg@GraySage.com> - 2012-02-02 17:41 -0700
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more kenney@cix.compulink.co.uk - 2012-02-03 14:23 -0600
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brian Drummond <brian@shapes.demon.co.uk> - 2012-02-04 10:46 +0000
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Erik Trulsson <ertr1013@student.uu.se> - 2012-02-06 08:57 +0000
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Marven Lee" <marven10@gmail.com> - 2012-02-06 13:12 +0000
              Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-06 14:07 +0000
              Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Nick Garnett <nickg@calivar.com> - 2012-02-06 14:29 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Marven Lee" <marven10@gmail.com> - 2012-02-07 12:06 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Nick Garnett <nickg@calivar.com> - 2012-02-07 17:18 +0000
  Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-02 15:09 -0600
    4- and 5-operand instructions (was: M68k) Mark Thorson <nospam@sonic.net> - 2012-02-02 17:29 -0800
      Re: 4- and 5-operand instructions Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-03 07:49 +0100
        Re: 4- and 5-operand instructions Mark Thorson <nospam@sonic.net> - 2012-02-03 09:36 -0800
      Re: 4- and 5-operand instructions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-03 23:43 -0600
      Re: 4- and 5-operand instructions "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-03 11:02 -0800
      Re: 4- and 5-operand instructions Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-04 12:16 -0800
        Re: 4- and 5-operand instructions "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-05 13:59 -0800
          Re: 4- and 5-operand instructions MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-05 14:38 -0800
      Re: 4- and 5-operand instructions (was: M68k) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-06 12:09 -0800
    Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-03 07:42 +0100
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-04 00:14 -0600
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-03 22:49 -0800
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-04 10:40 -0600
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-04 20:53 +0100
              Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-04 13:11 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-05 12:50 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-08 13:39 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-09 11:20 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-09 22:58 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-10 09:21 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-10 04:11 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Eric  Northup <digitaleric@gmail.com> - 2012-02-10 11:41 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-10 12:12 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-10 06:34 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2012-02-10 11:01 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-10 09:46 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-02-10 17:20 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-11 18:29 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-11 15:35 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-12 00:47 +0100
              Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-04 17:56 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-05 02:17 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-05 10:53 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-05 02:20 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nospam@ab-katrinedal.dk (Niels Jørgen Kruse) - 2012-02-05 11:31 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-05 09:34 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nospam@ab-katrinedal.dk (Niels Jørgen Kruse) - 2012-02-05 17:06 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-05 12:06 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-05 13:04 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-05 16:43 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-06 09:57 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-05 14:10 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-05 13:20 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-02-06 13:12 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-06 09:51 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-06 15:57 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-02-06 17:16 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-05 12:54 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-02-07 00:05 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-07 17:26 -0600
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-04 04:02 -0600
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-04 10:14 -0600
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-04 09:12 -0800
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-05 03:15 -0600
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-06 13:54 -0500
              Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-06 20:39 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-02-08 22:57 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-08 23:25 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-09 11:30 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-09 17:33 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-10 11:55 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-10 17:18 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-11 22:19 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-12 09:44 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-12 17:22 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-11 22:23 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-11 14:42 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-11 23:37 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-11 18:16 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-12 17:33 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-12 19:16 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-12 12:35 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-12 21:15 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-13 16:32 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-12 08:57 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-02-09 15:52 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Marven Lee" <marven10@gmail.com> - 2012-02-14 11:23 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-15 13:09 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-02-10 22:52 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-10 17:32 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-11 09:35 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-12 23:13 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-12 20:32 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-13 08:19 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-13 08:41 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-13 08:36 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-14 09:53 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-14 09:38 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-14 18:54 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-15 04:00 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-15 08:53 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-13 09:49 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-13 12:25 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-13 15:59 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-02-15 16:29 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-15 08:57 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-15 10:29 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-02-16 22:06 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2012-02-16 22:18 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-15 12:47 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-21 00:00 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-13 15:17 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-13 16:37 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-14 03:17 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-20 23:36 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-21 08:53 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-21 11:07 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-21 12:25 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-21 19:13 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-21 11:38 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-21 16:54 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-21 14:39 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-21 23:23 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-22 09:29 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-22 02:27 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-22 13:04 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-22 09:14 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-22 13:19 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Chris Gray <cg@GraySage.com> - 2012-02-22 13:41 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-22 10:28 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-22 08:32 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-23 07:36 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-22 08:15 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-02-22 16:46 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-23 07:47 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-21 19:53 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-22 00:05 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-22 08:23 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-22 08:49 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-22 18:17 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-23 15:24 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-24 03:28 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-23 20:09 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-24 08:53 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-24 19:27 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-24 13:07 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-24 08:44 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-24 18:04 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-02-24 21:18 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-24 21:23 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-24 09:54 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-24 18:40 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-24 11:15 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-24 20:49 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2012-02-24 17:22 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-24 22:39 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-02-25 03:00 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-24 17:44 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-24 23:11 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-24 19:22 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-25 10:14 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-25 07:37 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-25 15:57 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-25 13:39 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-25 23:26 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-26 10:09 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-26 02:45 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-26 13:05 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-27 00:53 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-27 15:22 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-27 09:21 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-27 19:47 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-28 19:16 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-02-29 05:07 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-29 10:49 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 10:14 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-29 08:28 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-29 08:24 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 16:43 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-29 09:08 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-27 12:23 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-28 17:12 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 09:09 +0000
                Re: Itanium fixed Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-27 20:33 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-02-25 11:15 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-25 18:10 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Erik Trulsson <ertr1013@student.uu.se> - 2012-02-27 08:47 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-25 12:37 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-25 21:42 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-26 21:00 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-27 09:48 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-27 12:01 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-27 06:02 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-02-28 02:04 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-27 20:58 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-27 06:00 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-27 14:05 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-27 09:37 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-27 11:31 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-27 11:46 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-27 17:46 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-27 19:42 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2012-02-28 08:22 +0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-28 06:39 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-28 08:26 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-28 08:45 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-28 08:58 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-28 17:24 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-02-29 00:19 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-29 09:27 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2012-02-29 17:17 +0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 09:03 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-02-29 10:39 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 13:10 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-28 13:15 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-28 22:28 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-28 16:13 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 10:04 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-29 10:26 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 18:28 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-29 12:14 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 18:02 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-02-29 00:26 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-27 11:51 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-27 06:06 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-27 08:39 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-27 09:33 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Thomas Womack <twomack@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2012-02-27 19:20 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-27 14:36 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-27 15:29 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-27 15:57 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-27 20:42 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-27 21:04 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Marven Lee" <marven10@gmail.com> - 2012-02-23 11:57 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2012-02-24 00:26 +0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-21 02:51 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-21 11:14 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-21 03:36 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-21 11:39 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-21 03:55 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-21 12:34 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-21 15:02 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-21 03:48 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-21 11:57 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-21 05:20 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-21 13:43 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-21 10:04 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-21 05:46 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-02-21 09:57 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-21 08:54 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-02-21 14:27 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-21 13:15 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-21 19:36 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-23 01:49 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-26 17:45 +0000
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-04 10:04 -0800
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-04 09:35 -0800
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-07 14:47 -0600
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-07 15:24 -0800
    Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-03 12:58 -0800
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-08 11:05 -0600
    Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-02-07 20:04 +0000
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-08 11:26 -0600
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-09 08:09 +0100
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-09 06:23 -0600
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-09 19:19 +0100
              Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-09 22:54 -0600
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-09 08:14 -0600
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-09 19:11 +0100

csiph-web