English Amiga Board


Go Back   English Amiga Board > Coders > Coders. General

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 22 June 2010, 18:57   #1
meynaf
son of 68k
meynaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lyon / France
Age: 47
Posts: 3,691
for ASM programmers

On the Natami forums i have suggested some extensions for the N68050 (there i post under the name Phil G). Perhaps some will make their way in it, perhaps none.
I thought it could be good to somehow poll this forum's programmers for their needs.
So i ask you guys : what new features would you see to come on 68k ?
If you were designing it, what new instructions / addressing modes would you add, with which encoding ?
meynaf is offline  
Old 23 June 2010, 17:10   #2
Thorham
Computer Nerd

Thorham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Rotterdam/Netherlands
Age: 43
Posts: 3,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by meynaf View Post
If you were designing it, what new instructions / addressing modes would you add, with which encoding ?
None what so ever. What I want to see is the classic hardware recreated. Original specs with extras that aren't CPU/chip set related.

To me, 68K is fine the way it is
Thorham is offline  
Old 23 June 2010, 21:58   #3
Photon
Moderator

Photon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Eksjö / Sweden
Posts: 4,818
I'm with Thorham! even though if the chipset is something like a combo of CD32 and AGA with extra steroids, it would be interesting to see a fully compatible CPU remade running at the full speed possible today.
Photon is offline  
Old 23 June 2010, 22:06   #4
Leffmann
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sweden
Posts: 2,265
I'd like to see all addressing modes available as both source and destination, but I don't know how to solve the instruction encoding.

There's some good programming practice mumbojumbo behind f.ex not allowing PC-relative as destination, but I think if you're writing assembly you should know your stuff well enough not to screw up more than otherwise.

Another funny restriction in the M68K is that EOR from memory is not allowed, while AND and OR is. Why is that?
Leffmann is offline  
Old 23 June 2010, 22:43   #5
Photon
Moderator

Photon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Eksjö / Sweden
Posts: 4,818
It could be that they ran out of encoding-bits left in the instruction word for that particular instruction or "instruction family" and thought it ugly to do a special separate instruction for that function. The encoding info in the programmer's manual could give a clue.

I should add that apart from a remade Amiga on steroids, I'm also all in favor of starting from the very base and get that perfect to build on that (Schoenfelt/A1k etc). Nothing wrong with that. But the ultimate dream would be to have a 100% compatible chipset and a completely remade but 100% compatible CPU at blinding speed (ie. super fast memory and running as fast as it can with excellent caches). That would open up some possibilities like fast web browsers and Javascript engines (HTML5 is the new black and Flash can go hide in shame, finally), and competent dev environments with nice high-level languages.

For other people of course, not me. I don't mind the limitations of the real deal, it's their challenge that is the reason for me to still be into Amigas.

Lordy, my English is starting to fail me, a clear signal that it's time for bed.
Photon is offline  
Old 24 June 2010, 13:13   #6
meynaf
son of 68k
meynaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lyon / France
Age: 47
Posts: 3,691
When Mot' did 68000 they profiled real programs.

And then they've seen that EOR is less often used than the two other logic operations.

But this is IMO one of the big mistakes of 68k : once out of 2, when i need memory EOR it's not here !

There was enough encoding space to make full EOR (by using line-A space), but now it's too late - or it will be 2 bytes longer.

Other things that are missing are ability to make exg with memory, e.g. exg.b (a0),d0

The speed of the cpu is something else ; my question was above all about new stuff for programmers.

Now what ? Don't anyone have suggestions ?
meynaf is offline  
Old 26 June 2010, 16:51   #7
Wepl
Moderator
Wepl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 709
a mea (move effective address, e.g. mea (_xx,pc),(12,a0)) would be nice
but I doubt that any new instruction make sense, compatibility for user programs is enough
Wepl is offline  
Old 26 June 2010, 17:10   #8
Leffmann
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sweden
Posts: 2,265
DBcc with longword size is probably something a lot of programmers have wished for.
Leffmann is offline  
Old 26 June 2010, 19:15   #9
Samurai_Crow
Total Chaos forever!

Samurai_Crow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ft. Collins, CO USA
Age: 45
Posts: 1,346
Send a message via Yahoo to Samurai_Crow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leffmann View Post
DBcc with longword size is probably something a lot of programmers have wished for.
That's already implemented in the '050. Anything else?
Samurai_Crow is offline  
Old 28 June 2010, 10:58   #10
TCD
Registered User

TCD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Germany
Age: 42
Posts: 24,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samurai_Crow View Post
That's already implemented in the '050. Anything else?
You mean it's already planned right?
TCD is offline  
Old 28 June 2010, 11:51   #11
meynaf
son of 68k
meynaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lyon / France
Age: 47
Posts: 3,691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wepl View Post
a mea (move effective address, e.g. mea (_xx,pc),(12,a0)) would be nice
but I doubt that any new instruction make sense, compatibility for user programs is enough
This one doesn't look like if it would be used quite often, but in fact you already have it if you want :
Code:
mea macro
 pea \1
 move.l (a7)+,\2
 endm
meynaf is offline  
Old 28 June 2010, 13:20   #12
pmc
gone
pmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: completely gone
Posts: 1,596
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leffmann
DBcc with longword size is probably something a lot of programmers have wished for.
DBcc with longs would be nice. There is a trick that can be done to psuedo allow this though:

Code:
 
; d7 is the loop counter
 subq.l #1,d7
.loop: <loop code>
 
 DBcc d7,.loop
 Bcc .exit
 
 sub.l #$10000,d7
 bcc .loop
.exit:
Where the condition code in DBcc and Bcc above must be the same...
pmc is offline  
Old 28 June 2010, 14:15   #13
Toni Wilen
WinUAE developer
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hämeenlinna/Finland
Age: 45
Posts: 23,662
IMHO these are useless micro-optimizations that no one really needs, they only fragment Amiga hardware more and more..
Toni Wilen is offline  
Old 28 June 2010, 16:05   #14
meynaf
son of 68k
meynaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lyon / France
Age: 47
Posts: 3,691
Fragmentation of Amiga HW is less important when you're gonna make a new machine anyway (with new features)... and this is the case with Natami.
meynaf is offline  
Old 28 June 2010, 16:57   #15
pandy71
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: PL
Posts: 1,690
Some DSP instructions? inverse addressing (bit reverse)? hardware loop?
pandy71 is offline  
Old 28 June 2010, 17:40   #16
Samurai_Crow
Total Chaos forever!

Samurai_Crow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ft. Collins, CO USA
Age: 45
Posts: 1,346
Send a message via Yahoo to Samurai_Crow
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid View Post
You mean it's already planned right?
The 68050 is approaching final release and you still think it's in planning?

The 5th from the bottom of this page.

BTW, a bit reverse and byte reverse opcode are currently in there also.
Samurai_Crow is offline  
Old 28 June 2010, 17:46   #17
Samurai_Crow
Total Chaos forever!

Samurai_Crow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ft. Collins, CO USA
Age: 45
Posts: 1,346
Send a message via Yahoo to Samurai_Crow
Quote:
Originally Posted by pandy71 View Post
Some DSP instructions? -snip-
NatAmi's team is working on an actual DSP independently of the '050. Details of this processor are sketchy at this time though.
Samurai_Crow is offline  
Old 28 June 2010, 18:00   #18
TCD
Registered User

TCD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Germany
Age: 42
Posts: 24,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samurai_Crow View Post
The 68050 is approaching final release and you still think it's in planning?

The 5th from the bottom of this page.
Was wondering why meynaf asked about stuff to add when the 68050 is already finished. So it's not, but that is already implemented. Okay.
TCD is offline  
Old 22 July 2010, 05:45   #19
midnitoker
Registered User
midnitoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London, UK
Posts: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid View Post
Was wondering why meynaf asked about stuff to add when the 68050 is already finished. So it's not, but that is already implemented. Okay.
meynaf may be asking for future updates. Since it is all code, those can be downloaded and written to the Altera chip. And if I may nitpick - "approaching final" != final...

In any case, even if hardware and FPGA coding are near completion, the original 3.1 kickstart will still need some tweaks, for example adding USB support, bits to do with RTG, and surely the OS3.9 setpatch. I think all that won`t be ready too soon.

Why do I think so? As an ASM coder, and once part of the team, I was asked a couple of months back, but I`m a bit busy on AROS right now...

Anyone here up to that task? Sadly Gunnar seems to think that such tweaks can be hacked together in a week - he is a game-coder, which is linear, and not quite the same as complex, often interdependent and multitasking routines, that need to support (crash free!) the OS...
midnitoker is offline  
Old 22 July 2010, 07:35   #20
TCD
Registered User

TCD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Germany
Age: 42
Posts: 24,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by midnitoker View Post
And if I may nitpick - "approaching final" != final...
Yes and that's why I've written 'So it's not'. Info on the news page of the NatAmi site is a tad sparse and I don't follow the forum tbh. Hence I didn't know in which stage the 68050 was/is. Just wondered why this question (extensions for ther 68050) appears now that it 'approaches final' and not before. That's all.
TCD is offline  
 


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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Who are/were the best programmers? Codetapper Retrogaming General Discussion 62 27 August 2010 23:53
Game programmers wanted please! Pyromania News 1 22 December 2005 01:40
For Game Programmers... DaphydTheBard Retrogaming General Discussion 46 26 November 2005 17:01
Programmers question Tolismlf Coders. General 6 12 December 2004 09:13
Got Programmers? Ian Retrogaming General Discussion 1 18 October 2001 01:57

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 23:46.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Page generated in 0.09206 seconds with 13 queries