Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more

From	ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com>
Newsgroups	comp.arch
Subject	Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more
Date	2012-04-04 20:38 +0000
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<jlibgl$ofu$1@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(4 earlier) <jlei2r$psb$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk> <jlf554$lpv$1@speranza.aioe.org> <3c05c00c-c54f-4ce3-bc2f-a66293740d10@ms3g2000pbb.googlegroups.com> <jlhh1m$hj1$1@speranza.aioe.org> <368d46cc-f967-4370-b879-2bc6421baff6@h5g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 04/04/12 14:17, Michael S wrote:

>
> All that *extremely* ISA dependent.
> Just for starter, different architecture have different status
> registers, some have status and control bits in a single register,
> others have them separate, some have no status register at all...
> As a bare minimum, if ISA does not support protected memory and has
> achitected in-memory stack (or shadow link register) then interrupt
> could save return address and nothing else. The rest is doable in
> software. Consequently, return from interrupt could be equivalent of
> regular return + setting of global interrupt enable flag.
> IIRC, TI C2000 and C5000 families are pretty close to this bare
> minimum.
>

It is, but I was tying to describe a general case about what should be
saved on entry to an isr. I guess the real thrust of the perhaps a bit
pedantic post was to rile against the suggestion that any modern cpu
has hidden mystical gotchas not covered by the docs. While there may
be bugs, these are usually quickly found and worked around. Ime, on
the few occasions that I have thought that there was a bug in a cpu or
peripheral controller, in every case, it's been either my
misinterpretation of the docs, or a bug in my own code.

Modern silicon from major vendors is very, very good, but gets more and
more complex and will need ever better systems programmers to create robust
code and get the best from it...

Regards,

Chris

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

Thread

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

csiph-web