Re: LisaEm 1.0.0-RC2 Available for download

On 9 juil, 17:04, Ray Arachelian <r..._at_email.domain.hidden> wrote:
> gilles wrote:
> > the most precise 68k core is the musashi (this is the core I choosed
> > after 2 tries (first one was the Castaway 68k core, then I tried
> > scream)). But It's not easy to compare since status bits are not
> > handled in the same way.
>
> What other cores have you tried?

The castaway Atari ST emulator (previously known as FAST) has it's own 68k core. Even if this emulator is not well known, the cpu emulation is good. It was the only I found with bus error emulation. Until version 0.2 or 0.4 my emulator was built with this core (but a bit modified).
I briefly tested Scream that is also an atari ST 68k core but it didn't work well.
So I moved to musashi that is used in MAME and MESS. Macworks booted correctly after that change.
The UAE cpu core is also interesting and very close to musashi.

>
> > I did this kind of job in the past to debug a java 6809 core. I traced
> > all the registers at every instruction. I then compared the results.
>
> It's a bit more complex in this case - I suspect I may have addressing
> mode issues, so in this case, I either have to maintain two address
> spaces, or trap the memory fetch/store requests from one core and
> compare it to the results in the other.
>
My 6809 CPU core declares the M pseudo register, so addressing was also traced.
In fact I could not run 2 cores in parallel since one code is C and the other is java.

> It's probably easier to maintain two address spaces, and then compare
> them after both instructions execute, but of course that's much slower.
> Alternatively, some sort of small table that has enough space to handle
> enough accesses for a full MOVEM instruction would work, and clear the
> table inbetween executed opcodes.
>
> The reason that I suspect this is because I've tested the Generator core
> against a real 68040 - so either I'm running into flag differences
> between the 68040 and the 68000, or it's something that's not tested,
> which means branching, or addressing modes.> I've noticed a problem with ROM selection in your new version. I had
> > to edit the conf file. This affects the Win32 version (I run XP pro).
>
> What's the issue you've encountered?

When I selected the rom file it was not stored (tried several times and path / restart).
I tried to save to another location to edit the conf file... and it worked.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LisaList" group. To post to this group, send email to lisalist_at_email.domain.hidden To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lisalist-unsubscribe_at_email.domain.hidden For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lisalist?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- Received on 2007-07-09 15:03:25