Suggested Change

BippyM · 20 July 2008, 16:17

Is it possible to change the PL_NOP to the number of NOPs required and not the number of bytes.

It's not difficult doubling the number of NOPS but seeing as you cannot NOP out an odd number anyway this seems a little odd!

StingRay · 20 July 2008, 16:32

You can NOP out odd numbers too.

1 NOP = 2 bytes = 1*2 bytes
13 NOPS = 26 bytes = 13*2 bytes.

However, I also think it's much more intuitive to have the number of NOPS instead of the number of bytes in the PL_NOP macro.

Wepl · 20 July 2008, 16:59

A question of taste I would say. Anyway, I cannot change this without breaking compatibility.
But you can make your own marco if you prefer it:

Code:

PL_MYNOP macro
  PL_NOP \1,\2*2
 endm

StingRay · 20 July 2008, 17:11

Yeah, indeed a question of taste.

Maybe you can add another NOP macro in the next release of WHDLOAD?

Something like PL_NOP_NUM or something.

Wepl · 20 July 2008, 17:31

Ok, I will add another macro. Would be PL_NOPS ok?

StingRay · 20 July 2008, 17:50

Perfect!

BippyM · 21 July 2008, 02:47

Superb

Expect my first working WHD release soon wepl

Wepl · 31 July 2008, 09:04

PL_NOPS has been added: http://whdload.de/whdload/whd169.lha

girv · 31 July 2008, 10:20

What happens if you run a patchlist with a PL_NOPS in it on WHDLoad < 16.9 ? Some sort of version error, right?

Would it be sensible to add a version check that also takes the minor version into consideration? Right now we can easily check for v16 using ws_Version in the slave header, but can't (for example) check for v16.9 rather than v16.8 without coding the check and error message ourselves.

I guess even if the secondary parameter of resload_Abort (with primary as TDREASON_WRONGVER) could be used to indicate the required revision, and resload_Abort displayed a suitable message when called this way, it'd be a help.

Just a suggestion. I haven't had my coffee yet, so be gentle.

Wepl · 31 July 2008, 17:24

get your coffee

its only a macro, for WHDLoad there is no difference:

Code:

PL_NOP		MACRO			;fill area with nop's
	PL_CMDADR PLCMD_NOP,\1
	dc.w	\2			;distance given in bytes
		ENDM
PL_NOPS		MACRO			;fill area with nop's
	PL_CMDADR PLCMD_NOP,\1
	dc.w	2*\2			;distance given in nop count
		ENDM

girv · 31 July 2008, 19:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wepl

get your coffee

Good advice!

20 July 2008, 16:17	#1
BippyM Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Derby, UK Age: 48 Posts: 9,355	Suggested Change Is it possible to change the PL_NOP to the number of NOPs required and not the number of bytes. It's not difficult doubling the number of NOPS but seeing as you cannot NOP out an odd number anyway this seems a little odd!

20 July 2008, 16:59	#3
Wepl Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Germany Posts: 866	A question of taste I would say. Anyway, I cannot change this without breaking compatibility. But you can make your own marco if you prefer it: Code: PL_MYNOP macro PL_NOP \1,\2*2 endm

31 July 2008, 17:24	#10
Wepl Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Germany Posts: 866	get your coffee its only a macro, for WHDLoad there is no difference: Code: PL_NOP MACRO ;fill area with nop's PL_CMDADR PLCMD_NOP,\1 dc.w \2 ;distance given in bytes ENDM PL_NOPS MACRO ;fill area with nop's PL_CMDADR PLCMD_NOP,\1 dc.w 2*\2 ;distance given in nop count ENDM

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
it was suggested i came here	sian	Member Introductions	4	07 June 2013 10:24
What would you change if you could	BippyM	Nostalgia & memories	29	12 March 2011 02:13
How do I change it?	Retrofan	support.Apps	1	01 February 2011 19:24
change the cd-rom unit number(sorry wrong place if a moderator can change)	turrican3	support.OtherUAE	19	04 May 2007 23:27
All change	Ian	project.EAB	19	12 January 2002 19:47

20 July 2008, 16:32	#2
StingRay move.l #$c0ff33,throat Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Berlin/Joymoney Posts: 6,863	You can NOP out odd numbers too. 1 NOP = 2 bytes = 12 bytes 13 NOPS = 26 bytes = 132 bytes. However, I also think it's much more intuitive to have the number of NOPS instead of the number of bytes in the PL_NOP macro.

20 July 2008, 17:11	#4
StingRay move.l #$c0ff33,throat Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Berlin/Joymoney Posts: 6,863	Yeah, indeed a question of taste. Maybe you can add another NOP macro in the next release of WHDLOAD? Something like PL_NOP_NUM or something.

20 July 2008, 17:31	#5
Wepl Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Germany Posts: 866	Ok, I will add another macro. Would be PL_NOPS ok?

20 July 2008, 17:50	#6
StingRay move.l #$c0ff33,throat Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Berlin/Joymoney Posts: 6,863	Perfect!

21 July 2008, 02:47	#7
BippyM Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Derby, UK Age: 48 Posts: 9,355	Superb Expect my first working WHD release soon wepl

31 July 2008, 09:04	#8
Wepl Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Germany Posts: 866	PL_NOPS has been added: http://whdload.de/whdload/whd169.lha

31 July 2008, 10:20	#9
girv Mostly Harmless Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Northern Ireland Posts: 1,109	What happens if you run a patchlist with a PL_NOPS in it on WHDLoad < 16.9 ? Some sort of version error, right? Would it be sensible to add a version check that also takes the minor version into consideration? Right now we can easily check for v16 using ws_Version in the slave header, but can't (for example) check for v16.9 rather than v16.8 without coding the check and error message ourselves. I guess even if the secondary parameter of resload_Abort (with primary as TDREASON_WRONGVER) could be used to indicate the required revision, and resload_Abort displayed a suitable message when called this way, it'd be a help. Just a suggestion. I haven't had my coffee yet, so be gentle.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)