Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
| From | nmm1@cam.ac.uk |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.arch |
| Subject | Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more |
| Date | 2012-02-24 20:49 +0000 |
| Organization | Department of Deniable Assertions |
| Message-ID | <ji8t3u$8cs$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk> (permalink) |
| References | <ggtgp-8D1AEA.03180231012012@netnews.mchsi.com> <4F47CEE5.6000107@SPAM.comp-arch.net> <ji8liq$7rn$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk> <4F47E1C8.2030909@SPAM.comp-arch.net> |
In article <4F47E1C8.2030909@SPAM.comp-arch.net>, Andy (Super) Glew <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> wrote: >> >> 1) For interrupts to be reliable, no interruptible process may >> ever call a non-interruptible primitive that potentially may run >> longer than the maximum interrupt delay. It is almost impossible >> to overstate the severity of failure to enforce that on RAS. > >This same issue also applies to the hardware cooperative multitasking >with a non-recoverable user error if blocked too long I mentioned later >- the only scheme I can imagine working, as you propose. (Which is not >to say you may not have other schemes in mind.) However, it applies to a lesser extent. If, as I was proposing, I/O control is hived off to a separate core, then the core running the main process is recoverable. Also, it is much easier in hardware, devices and the kernel to accept a signal saying "abandon what you are doing and return, disgracefully" than it is to accept an interrupt and resume later. >Although admittedly the latter is safer, because the non-recoverable >cooperative MT timeout is unambiguously an error. Although losing an >interrupt is also a detectable error. In theory - not in much modern software :-( >> 2) If a process can be arbitrarily interrupted, then it must >> allow for ANY potentially shared external state to change at ANY >> point. Even when it can and does test and retry, the result of >> doing so is often livelock. > >This same issue also applies to any shared memory. Eh? No, it applies only to memory that is shared between two independent processes, and damn few systems support that even as an option. Almost all sharing is within a process. The killer about interrupts is that something completely unrelated can do the changing. >Years ago, "concurrent programming" was the hard problem. "Concurrent" >basically mean "can be interrupted and swapped at almost any point". >I.e. it seems to me that Dijkstra's interest in semaphores, etc. was >prompted by asynchronous interrupts. Nowadays, the problem is >exacerbated by MP and MT parallelism. Agreed. >> It's possible. It is the sort of thing that I am saying would help >> a great deal with the RAS of systems (and I mean systems, not just >> hardware). I fail to see the problem with it, other than on >> religious grounds. > >The problems I see are mainly the verdict of history: it's been tried. >It has failed in the marketplace. I will accept that, but the same was true of wireless technology at one point. The reason that the wheel may turn is that we are seeing a continual reduction in RAS - this is unlikely to reverse or even halt, until and unless there is some spectacular disaster. But that's politics - what I was talking about was engineering, and a way to build a better mousetrap. >I do not know of shipping products with HW cooperative multithreading >via inserted "interrupt me here" places. (Although we considered such >at Gould, and also for Itanium.) Nor do I. I didn't know that you considered it, but am not surprised. >SW cooperative multitasking has commonly been used, e.g. early Apple >OSes, but has nearly everywhere been supplanted by true preemptive >multitasking. SW cooperative multitasking was widely blamed for >responsiveness problems. (By the way, if you have ever been annoyed by >a spreadsheet that starts a big recalc, and then is slow to respond to >^C - well, that is SW cooperative multitasking.) Well, as Bjarne posted on a WG21 mailing list recently, the better implementations of it beat the hell out of preemptive multitasking, and it is still used for that reason on many embedded systems. I am not, of course, surprised at incompetence in writing software. >By the way, it may be worth distinguishing user code from kernel code. > >User code on most modern systems cannot block interrupts. Its >non-interruptible actions are restricted to what is provided by hardware >or the OS. (Leading to what I called the "waiting on a non-running >process" problem, to which FUTEX is a klugey solution.) Not entirely. They can block almost anything mapped to a signal, and malicious or seriously problematic code can effectively block interrupts by suitable system calls. That is a common source of system misbehaviour. Very common :-( One of the reasons that I loathe interrupts is that they are claimed to resolve that problem, but they haven't on any system I have looked at in depth. And the fact that they are claimed to means that the solution is to add yet another hack to remove the particular problem, which often adds another one, which needs another hack to resolve, which .... Regards, Nick Maclaren.
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 Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-04-04 10:23 +0200
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-04 13:54 -0700
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-04 15:22 -0700
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-04 16:11 -0700
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-04-04 19:24 -0700
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-05 11:01 -0700
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-04-04 13:07 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-04 07:17 -0700
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-04-04 20:38 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-04-06 21:24 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more kenney@cix.compulink.co.uk - 2012-04-07 04:21 -0500
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2012-04-07 11:28 +0100
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-07 08:57 -0700
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2012-04-10 11:13 +0200
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2012-04-10 13:55 +0100
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-04-10 16:44 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-10 13:03 -0500
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-04-10 19:11 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2012-04-10 19:09 +0100
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-04-08 14:47 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-07 19:20 +0100
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-04-04 09:55 -0400
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-04-04 14:33 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-04 07:57 -0700
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-04-04 22:46 +0000
Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-04 10:04 +0100
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 nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-04 09:53 +0100
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 nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-04 12:48 +0100
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 nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-04 09:59 +0100
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