Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
| Path | csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | "Marven Lee" <marven10@gmail.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.arch |
| Subject | Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more |
| Date | Tue, 14 Feb 2012 11:23:06 -0000 |
| Lines | 80 |
| Message-ID | <9puul6FihkU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | <ggtgp-8D1AEA.03180231012012@netnews.mchsi.com> <rmVXq.16275$%17.4870@newsfe06.iad> <jgpdpf$k2d$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk> <jguuk4$7ou$1@reader1.panix.com> <jgv09r$ns$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk> <_wSYq.1381$Qb4.495@newsfe21.iad> |
| Mime-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 7bit |
| X-Trace | individual.net cryLA9m2AgHVG3Pp2CLJeA4rx68icIO+usbr4QLAVTlk1QYcJD |
| Cancel-Lock | sha1:+baJWS745dNP7yCftpJaHBqhQnE= |
| In-Reply-To | <_wSYq.1381$Qb4.495@newsfe21.iad> |
| X-Priority | 3 |
| X-MSMail-Priority | Normal |
| X-Newsreader | Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18197 |
| X-MimeOLE | Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6002.18463 |
| Xref | x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.arch:5928 |
Show key headers only | View raw
EricP wrote: > Maybe in IBM land but most others do not change address space > because it is expensive and unnecessary. Linux followed the > Mach microkernel model and did switch up to 2.4 but after > that they changed to what others do: just don't switch. > > The kernel virtual space is "common mapped" into the high > address space of all processes by having the same virtual > address PTE's point to the same physical frame in every process, > with page access protected to supervisor mode only. I believe early versions of Linux 0.1x used x86 segmentation to divide a single 4gb address space into 64 64mb partitions. The kernel would be located in the first 64mb followed by 63 process slots of 64mb each. The first 64mb would map the kernel and all of physical memory but the kernel's segments would span the whole 4gb. This post implies that in the mid 90s the x86 version of QNX did something similar: http://groups.google.com/group/comp.arch/msg/300a86fb3dd7908e Along with not flushing the TLBs on a process switch it would have made it easier for the kernel to copy messages between processes. Using an address space layout like that allows messages to be specified as overlapping segments. Message segments could be accessed by the server by storing the segment selector in its descriptor tables. Effectively message IDs are segment selectors. A syscall would be needed to get the next message, but reading and writing the data could be done without the need for further syscalls. It also allows random access to the data. It would need either a compiler to support far pointers to access messages or inline assembly like inbyte, outbyte etc. Perhaps messages could be a pair of segments, one for the header and one for the data or even multiple data segments. The limit of concurrent messages a server could handle would depend on how big it's segment descriptor table was. Anyway... It is my understanding that Linux then did away with segmentation to make the kernel easier to port and went with a 3gb user and 1gb kernel address space layout. I might be wrong but I believe the kernel mapped the first gigbyte of physical memory into the 1gb of kernel memory. There were patches that altered the user/ kernel split to 2gb/2gb and I think 1gb user / 3gb kernel. There was a 4gb/4gb patch that mapped the kernel to the upper 16mb of the address space and switched to the full kernel address space upon entry to a syscall. Maybe it only switched if needed, I'm not so sure and I assume that the kernel mapped upto 4gb of memory into it's space. A similar technique, well actually it's more like signal handlers can be used to implement multiple protection rings, either with full 4gb address spaces or staggered so that the more privileged rings map the lower rings into their address spaces. All rings run in user mode, the kernel only needing to implement call and return system calls to transfer between address spaces. Extra syscalls are needed to handle things like invalidating TLBs and whatever else can't be done from user-mode. Call and Return syscalls could be added to current operating systems to divide user space of each process into 2 or more protection rings. Each process could maintain 2 page directories, one with all of user-mode mapped for the monitor or more privileged ring. The other page directory for the less privileged code only maps half of the user mode address space. Alternatively the Return syscall could take min/max address parameters and only mapping a part of the lower ring to effectively make a sandbox. Maybe user-mode Linux does something similar or it uses segmentation. -- Marv
Back to comp.arch | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
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 "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-29 12:17 -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 Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-02-29 23:08 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 23:36 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2012-03-01 15:32 -0500
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-03-01 20:52 +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 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-29 11:24 -0800
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 19:32 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2012-03-01 03:37 +0800
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 EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-29 13:44 -0500
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 19:24 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-29 16:22 -0500
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 22:41 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more mrs@kithrup.com (Mike Stump) - 2012-03-05 08:46 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-03-05 09:27 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-03-27 22:13 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-03-27 22:59 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-03-28 11:11 +0100
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-03-28 18:09 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-03-28 22:29 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-04-02 15:53 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-03 11:06 +0100
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-04-03 15:31 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-03 12:31 -0700
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-03 17:51 -0700
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-03 12:24 -0700
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-03-28 15:50 -0700
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-03-29 11:21 -0700
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-03-30 11:58 -0700
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-03 12:39 +0100
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-03-29 11:43 +0100
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-04-02 16:41 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-03 11:09 +0100
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-29 06:53 -0700
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-03 11:17 +0100
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-03 06:15 -0700
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-03 15:03 +0100
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-03 07:57 -0700
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-03 07:11 -0700
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-03-28 12:24 -0700
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 "Marven Lee" <marven10@gmail.com> - 2012-03-05 10:46 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2012-03-01 14:16 +0100
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 ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-03-27 22:35 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-03-28 09:52 +0200
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com> - 2012-03-28 23:14 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-03-29 13:16 +0200
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 jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-02-29 22:50 +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