Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
#define op(id, name, ...) case id: return instruction##name(__VA_ARGS__);
|
|
|
|
#define fp(name) &SPC700::algorithm##name
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
auto SPC700::instruction() -> void {
|
Update to v103r06 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- processor/spc700: restored fetch/load/store/pull/push shorthand
functions
- processor/spc700: split functions that tested the algorithm used (`op
!= &SPC700:...`) to separate instructions
- mostly for code clarity over code size: it was awkward having
cycle counts change based on a function parameter
- processor/spc700: implemented Overload's new findings on which
cycles are truly internal (no bus reads)
- sfc/smp: TEST register emulation has been vastly improved¹
¹: it turns out that TEST.d4,d5 is the external clock divider (used
when accessing RAM through the DSP), and TEST.d6,d7 is the internal
clock divider (used when accessing IPLROM, IO registers, or during idle
cycles.)
The DSP (24576khz) feeds its clock / 12 through to the SMP (2048khz).
The clock divider setting further divides the clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Since 8 and 16 are not cleanly divislbe by 12, the SMP cycle count
glitches out and seems to take 10 and 2 clocks instead of 8 or 16. This
can on real hardware either cause the SMP to run very slowly, or more
likely, crash the SMP completely until reset.
What's even stranger is the timers aren't affected by this. They still
clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Note that technically I could divide my own clock counters by 24 and
reduce these to {1,2,5,10} and {1,2,4,8}, I instead chose to divide by
12 to better illustrate this hardware issue and better model that the
SMP clock runs at 2048khz and not 1024khz.
Further, note that things aren't 100% perfect yet. This seems to throw
off some tests, such as blargg's `test_timer_speed`. I can't tell how
far off I am because blargg's test tragically doesn't print out fail
values. But you can see the improvements in that higan is now passing
all of Revenant's tests that were obviously completely wrong before.
2017-07-03 07:24:47 +00:00
|
|
|
switch(fetch()) {
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x00, NoOperation)
|
|
|
|
op(0x01, CallTable, 0)
|
|
|
|
op(0x02, AbsoluteBitSet, 0, true)
|
|
|
|
op(0x03, BranchBit, 0, true)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x04, DirectRead, fp(OR), A)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x05, AbsoluteRead, fp(OR), A)
|
|
|
|
op(0x06, IndirectXRead, fp(OR))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x07, IndexedIndirectRead, fp(OR), X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x08, ImmediateRead, fp(OR), A)
|
Update to v103r06 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- processor/spc700: restored fetch/load/store/pull/push shorthand
functions
- processor/spc700: split functions that tested the algorithm used (`op
!= &SPC700:...`) to separate instructions
- mostly for code clarity over code size: it was awkward having
cycle counts change based on a function parameter
- processor/spc700: implemented Overload's new findings on which
cycles are truly internal (no bus reads)
- sfc/smp: TEST register emulation has been vastly improved¹
¹: it turns out that TEST.d4,d5 is the external clock divider (used
when accessing RAM through the DSP), and TEST.d6,d7 is the internal
clock divider (used when accessing IPLROM, IO registers, or during idle
cycles.)
The DSP (24576khz) feeds its clock / 12 through to the SMP (2048khz).
The clock divider setting further divides the clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Since 8 and 16 are not cleanly divislbe by 12, the SMP cycle count
glitches out and seems to take 10 and 2 clocks instead of 8 or 16. This
can on real hardware either cause the SMP to run very slowly, or more
likely, crash the SMP completely until reset.
What's even stranger is the timers aren't affected by this. They still
clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Note that technically I could divide my own clock counters by 24 and
reduce these to {1,2,5,10} and {1,2,4,8}, I instead chose to divide by
12 to better illustrate this hardware issue and better model that the
SMP clock runs at 2048khz and not 1024khz.
Further, note that things aren't 100% perfect yet. This seems to throw
off some tests, such as blargg's `test_timer_speed`. I can't tell how
far off I am because blargg's test tragically doesn't print out fail
values. But you can see the improvements in that higan is now passing
all of Revenant's tests that were obviously completely wrong before.
2017-07-03 07:24:47 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x09, DirectDirectModify, fp(OR))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x0a, AbsoluteBitModify, 0)
|
|
|
|
op(0x0b, DirectModify, fp(ASL))
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x0c, AbsoluteModify, fp(ASL))
|
|
|
|
op(0x0d, Push, P)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x0e, TestSetBitsAbsolute, true)
|
|
|
|
op(0x0f, Break)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x10, Branch, NF == 0)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x11, CallTable, 1)
|
|
|
|
op(0x12, AbsoluteBitSet, 0, false)
|
|
|
|
op(0x13, BranchBit, 0, false)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x14, DirectIndexedRead, fp(OR), A, X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x15, AbsoluteIndexedRead, fp(OR), X)
|
|
|
|
op(0x16, AbsoluteIndexedRead, fp(OR), Y)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x17, IndirectIndexedRead, fp(OR), Y)
|
Update to v103r06 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- processor/spc700: restored fetch/load/store/pull/push shorthand
functions
- processor/spc700: split functions that tested the algorithm used (`op
!= &SPC700:...`) to separate instructions
- mostly for code clarity over code size: it was awkward having
cycle counts change based on a function parameter
- processor/spc700: implemented Overload's new findings on which
cycles are truly internal (no bus reads)
- sfc/smp: TEST register emulation has been vastly improved¹
¹: it turns out that TEST.d4,d5 is the external clock divider (used
when accessing RAM through the DSP), and TEST.d6,d7 is the internal
clock divider (used when accessing IPLROM, IO registers, or during idle
cycles.)
The DSP (24576khz) feeds its clock / 12 through to the SMP (2048khz).
The clock divider setting further divides the clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Since 8 and 16 are not cleanly divislbe by 12, the SMP cycle count
glitches out and seems to take 10 and 2 clocks instead of 8 or 16. This
can on real hardware either cause the SMP to run very slowly, or more
likely, crash the SMP completely until reset.
What's even stranger is the timers aren't affected by this. They still
clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Note that technically I could divide my own clock counters by 24 and
reduce these to {1,2,5,10} and {1,2,4,8}, I instead chose to divide by
12 to better illustrate this hardware issue and better model that the
SMP clock runs at 2048khz and not 1024khz.
Further, note that things aren't 100% perfect yet. This seems to throw
off some tests, such as blargg's `test_timer_speed`. I can't tell how
far off I am because blargg's test tragically doesn't print out fail
values. But you can see the improvements in that higan is now passing
all of Revenant's tests that were obviously completely wrong before.
2017-07-03 07:24:47 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x18, DirectImmediateModify, fp(OR))
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x19, IndirectXWriteIndirectY, fp(OR))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x1a, DirectModifyWord, -1)
|
|
|
|
op(0x1b, DirectIndexedModify, fp(ASL), X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x1c, ImpliedModify, fp(ASL), A)
|
|
|
|
op(0x1d, ImpliedModify, fp(DEC), X)
|
|
|
|
op(0x1e, AbsoluteRead, fp(CMP), X)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x1f, JumpIndirectX)
|
|
|
|
op(0x20, FlagSet, PF, false)
|
|
|
|
op(0x21, CallTable, 2)
|
|
|
|
op(0x22, AbsoluteBitSet, 1, true)
|
|
|
|
op(0x23, BranchBit, 1, true)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x24, DirectRead, fp(AND), A)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x25, AbsoluteRead, fp(AND), A)
|
|
|
|
op(0x26, IndirectXRead, fp(AND))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x27, IndexedIndirectRead, fp(AND), X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x28, ImmediateRead, fp(AND), A)
|
Update to v103r06 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- processor/spc700: restored fetch/load/store/pull/push shorthand
functions
- processor/spc700: split functions that tested the algorithm used (`op
!= &SPC700:...`) to separate instructions
- mostly for code clarity over code size: it was awkward having
cycle counts change based on a function parameter
- processor/spc700: implemented Overload's new findings on which
cycles are truly internal (no bus reads)
- sfc/smp: TEST register emulation has been vastly improved¹
¹: it turns out that TEST.d4,d5 is the external clock divider (used
when accessing RAM through the DSP), and TEST.d6,d7 is the internal
clock divider (used when accessing IPLROM, IO registers, or during idle
cycles.)
The DSP (24576khz) feeds its clock / 12 through to the SMP (2048khz).
The clock divider setting further divides the clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Since 8 and 16 are not cleanly divislbe by 12, the SMP cycle count
glitches out and seems to take 10 and 2 clocks instead of 8 or 16. This
can on real hardware either cause the SMP to run very slowly, or more
likely, crash the SMP completely until reset.
What's even stranger is the timers aren't affected by this. They still
clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Note that technically I could divide my own clock counters by 24 and
reduce these to {1,2,5,10} and {1,2,4,8}, I instead chose to divide by
12 to better illustrate this hardware issue and better model that the
SMP clock runs at 2048khz and not 1024khz.
Further, note that things aren't 100% perfect yet. This seems to throw
off some tests, such as blargg's `test_timer_speed`. I can't tell how
far off I am because blargg's test tragically doesn't print out fail
values. But you can see the improvements in that higan is now passing
all of Revenant's tests that were obviously completely wrong before.
2017-07-03 07:24:47 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x29, DirectDirectModify, fp(AND))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x2a, AbsoluteBitModify, 1)
|
|
|
|
op(0x2b, DirectModify, fp(ROL))
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x2c, AbsoluteModify, fp(ROL))
|
|
|
|
op(0x2d, Push, A)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x2e, BranchNotDirect)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x2f, Branch, true)
|
|
|
|
op(0x30, Branch, NF == 1)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x31, CallTable, 3)
|
|
|
|
op(0x32, AbsoluteBitSet, 1, false)
|
|
|
|
op(0x33, BranchBit, 1, false)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x34, DirectIndexedRead, fp(AND), A, X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x35, AbsoluteIndexedRead, fp(AND), X)
|
|
|
|
op(0x36, AbsoluteIndexedRead, fp(AND), Y)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x37, IndirectIndexedRead, fp(AND), Y)
|
Update to v103r06 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- processor/spc700: restored fetch/load/store/pull/push shorthand
functions
- processor/spc700: split functions that tested the algorithm used (`op
!= &SPC700:...`) to separate instructions
- mostly for code clarity over code size: it was awkward having
cycle counts change based on a function parameter
- processor/spc700: implemented Overload's new findings on which
cycles are truly internal (no bus reads)
- sfc/smp: TEST register emulation has been vastly improved¹
¹: it turns out that TEST.d4,d5 is the external clock divider (used
when accessing RAM through the DSP), and TEST.d6,d7 is the internal
clock divider (used when accessing IPLROM, IO registers, or during idle
cycles.)
The DSP (24576khz) feeds its clock / 12 through to the SMP (2048khz).
The clock divider setting further divides the clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Since 8 and 16 are not cleanly divislbe by 12, the SMP cycle count
glitches out and seems to take 10 and 2 clocks instead of 8 or 16. This
can on real hardware either cause the SMP to run very slowly, or more
likely, crash the SMP completely until reset.
What's even stranger is the timers aren't affected by this. They still
clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Note that technically I could divide my own clock counters by 24 and
reduce these to {1,2,5,10} and {1,2,4,8}, I instead chose to divide by
12 to better illustrate this hardware issue and better model that the
SMP clock runs at 2048khz and not 1024khz.
Further, note that things aren't 100% perfect yet. This seems to throw
off some tests, such as blargg's `test_timer_speed`. I can't tell how
far off I am because blargg's test tragically doesn't print out fail
values. But you can see the improvements in that higan is now passing
all of Revenant's tests that were obviously completely wrong before.
2017-07-03 07:24:47 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x38, DirectImmediateModify, fp(AND))
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x39, IndirectXWriteIndirectY, fp(AND))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x3a, DirectModifyWord, +1)
|
|
|
|
op(0x3b, DirectIndexedModify, fp(ROL), A)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x3c, ImpliedModify, fp(ROL), A)
|
|
|
|
op(0x3d, ImpliedModify, fp(INC), X)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x3e, DirectRead, fp(CMP), X)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x3f, CallAbsolute)
|
|
|
|
op(0x40, FlagSet, PF, true)
|
|
|
|
op(0x41, CallTable, 4)
|
|
|
|
op(0x42, AbsoluteBitSet, 2, true)
|
|
|
|
op(0x43, BranchBit, 2, true)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x44, DirectRead, fp(EOR), A)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x45, AbsoluteRead, fp(EOR), A)
|
|
|
|
op(0x46, IndirectXRead, fp(EOR))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x47, IndexedIndirectRead, fp(EOR), X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x48, ImmediateRead, fp(EOR), A)
|
Update to v103r06 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- processor/spc700: restored fetch/load/store/pull/push shorthand
functions
- processor/spc700: split functions that tested the algorithm used (`op
!= &SPC700:...`) to separate instructions
- mostly for code clarity over code size: it was awkward having
cycle counts change based on a function parameter
- processor/spc700: implemented Overload's new findings on which
cycles are truly internal (no bus reads)
- sfc/smp: TEST register emulation has been vastly improved¹
¹: it turns out that TEST.d4,d5 is the external clock divider (used
when accessing RAM through the DSP), and TEST.d6,d7 is the internal
clock divider (used when accessing IPLROM, IO registers, or during idle
cycles.)
The DSP (24576khz) feeds its clock / 12 through to the SMP (2048khz).
The clock divider setting further divides the clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Since 8 and 16 are not cleanly divislbe by 12, the SMP cycle count
glitches out and seems to take 10 and 2 clocks instead of 8 or 16. This
can on real hardware either cause the SMP to run very slowly, or more
likely, crash the SMP completely until reset.
What's even stranger is the timers aren't affected by this. They still
clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Note that technically I could divide my own clock counters by 24 and
reduce these to {1,2,5,10} and {1,2,4,8}, I instead chose to divide by
12 to better illustrate this hardware issue and better model that the
SMP clock runs at 2048khz and not 1024khz.
Further, note that things aren't 100% perfect yet. This seems to throw
off some tests, such as blargg's `test_timer_speed`. I can't tell how
far off I am because blargg's test tragically doesn't print out fail
values. But you can see the improvements in that higan is now passing
all of Revenant's tests that were obviously completely wrong before.
2017-07-03 07:24:47 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x49, DirectDirectModify, fp(EOR))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x4a, AbsoluteBitModify, 2)
|
|
|
|
op(0x4b, DirectModify, fp(LSR))
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x4c, AbsoluteModify, fp(LSR))
|
|
|
|
op(0x4d, Push, X)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x4e, TestSetBitsAbsolute, false)
|
|
|
|
op(0x4f, CallPage)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x50, Branch, VF == 0)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x51, CallTable, 5)
|
|
|
|
op(0x52, AbsoluteBitSet, 2, false)
|
|
|
|
op(0x53, BranchBit, 2, false)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x54, DirectIndexedRead, fp(EOR), A, X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x55, AbsoluteIndexedRead, fp(EOR), X)
|
|
|
|
op(0x56, AbsoluteIndexedRead, fp(EOR), Y)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x57, IndirectIndexedRead, fp(EOR), Y)
|
Update to v103r06 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- processor/spc700: restored fetch/load/store/pull/push shorthand
functions
- processor/spc700: split functions that tested the algorithm used (`op
!= &SPC700:...`) to separate instructions
- mostly for code clarity over code size: it was awkward having
cycle counts change based on a function parameter
- processor/spc700: implemented Overload's new findings on which
cycles are truly internal (no bus reads)
- sfc/smp: TEST register emulation has been vastly improved¹
¹: it turns out that TEST.d4,d5 is the external clock divider (used
when accessing RAM through the DSP), and TEST.d6,d7 is the internal
clock divider (used when accessing IPLROM, IO registers, or during idle
cycles.)
The DSP (24576khz) feeds its clock / 12 through to the SMP (2048khz).
The clock divider setting further divides the clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Since 8 and 16 are not cleanly divislbe by 12, the SMP cycle count
glitches out and seems to take 10 and 2 clocks instead of 8 or 16. This
can on real hardware either cause the SMP to run very slowly, or more
likely, crash the SMP completely until reset.
What's even stranger is the timers aren't affected by this. They still
clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Note that technically I could divide my own clock counters by 24 and
reduce these to {1,2,5,10} and {1,2,4,8}, I instead chose to divide by
12 to better illustrate this hardware issue and better model that the
SMP clock runs at 2048khz and not 1024khz.
Further, note that things aren't 100% perfect yet. This seems to throw
off some tests, such as blargg's `test_timer_speed`. I can't tell how
far off I am because blargg's test tragically doesn't print out fail
values. But you can see the improvements in that higan is now passing
all of Revenant's tests that were obviously completely wrong before.
2017-07-03 07:24:47 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x58, DirectImmediateModify, fp(EOR))
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x59, IndirectXWriteIndirectY, fp(EOR))
|
Update to v103r06 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- processor/spc700: restored fetch/load/store/pull/push shorthand
functions
- processor/spc700: split functions that tested the algorithm used (`op
!= &SPC700:...`) to separate instructions
- mostly for code clarity over code size: it was awkward having
cycle counts change based on a function parameter
- processor/spc700: implemented Overload's new findings on which
cycles are truly internal (no bus reads)
- sfc/smp: TEST register emulation has been vastly improved¹
¹: it turns out that TEST.d4,d5 is the external clock divider (used
when accessing RAM through the DSP), and TEST.d6,d7 is the internal
clock divider (used when accessing IPLROM, IO registers, or during idle
cycles.)
The DSP (24576khz) feeds its clock / 12 through to the SMP (2048khz).
The clock divider setting further divides the clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Since 8 and 16 are not cleanly divislbe by 12, the SMP cycle count
glitches out and seems to take 10 and 2 clocks instead of 8 or 16. This
can on real hardware either cause the SMP to run very slowly, or more
likely, crash the SMP completely until reset.
What's even stranger is the timers aren't affected by this. They still
clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Note that technically I could divide my own clock counters by 24 and
reduce these to {1,2,5,10} and {1,2,4,8}, I instead chose to divide by
12 to better illustrate this hardware issue and better model that the
SMP clock runs at 2048khz and not 1024khz.
Further, note that things aren't 100% perfect yet. This seems to throw
off some tests, such as blargg's `test_timer_speed`. I can't tell how
far off I am because blargg's test tragically doesn't print out fail
values. But you can see the improvements in that higan is now passing
all of Revenant's tests that were obviously completely wrong before.
2017-07-03 07:24:47 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x5a, DirectCompareWord, fp(CPW))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x5b, DirectIndexedModify, fp(LSR), X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x5c, ImpliedModify, fp(LSR), A)
|
|
|
|
op(0x5d, Transfer, A, X)
|
|
|
|
op(0x5e, AbsoluteRead, fp(CMP), Y)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x5f, JumpAbsolute)
|
|
|
|
op(0x60, FlagSet, CF, false)
|
|
|
|
op(0x61, CallTable, 6)
|
|
|
|
op(0x62, AbsoluteBitSet, 3, true)
|
|
|
|
op(0x63, BranchBit, 3, true)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x64, DirectRead, fp(CMP), A)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x65, AbsoluteRead, fp(CMP), A)
|
|
|
|
op(0x66, IndirectXRead, fp(CMP))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x67, IndexedIndirectRead, fp(CMP), X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x68, ImmediateRead, fp(CMP), A)
|
Update to v103r06 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- processor/spc700: restored fetch/load/store/pull/push shorthand
functions
- processor/spc700: split functions that tested the algorithm used (`op
!= &SPC700:...`) to separate instructions
- mostly for code clarity over code size: it was awkward having
cycle counts change based on a function parameter
- processor/spc700: implemented Overload's new findings on which
cycles are truly internal (no bus reads)
- sfc/smp: TEST register emulation has been vastly improved¹
¹: it turns out that TEST.d4,d5 is the external clock divider (used
when accessing RAM through the DSP), and TEST.d6,d7 is the internal
clock divider (used when accessing IPLROM, IO registers, or during idle
cycles.)
The DSP (24576khz) feeds its clock / 12 through to the SMP (2048khz).
The clock divider setting further divides the clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Since 8 and 16 are not cleanly divislbe by 12, the SMP cycle count
glitches out and seems to take 10 and 2 clocks instead of 8 or 16. This
can on real hardware either cause the SMP to run very slowly, or more
likely, crash the SMP completely until reset.
What's even stranger is the timers aren't affected by this. They still
clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Note that technically I could divide my own clock counters by 24 and
reduce these to {1,2,5,10} and {1,2,4,8}, I instead chose to divide by
12 to better illustrate this hardware issue and better model that the
SMP clock runs at 2048khz and not 1024khz.
Further, note that things aren't 100% perfect yet. This seems to throw
off some tests, such as blargg's `test_timer_speed`. I can't tell how
far off I am because blargg's test tragically doesn't print out fail
values. But you can see the improvements in that higan is now passing
all of Revenant's tests that were obviously completely wrong before.
2017-07-03 07:24:47 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x69, DirectDirectCompare, fp(CMP))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x6a, AbsoluteBitModify, 3)
|
|
|
|
op(0x6b, DirectModify, fp(ROR))
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x6c, AbsoluteModify, fp(ROR))
|
|
|
|
op(0x6d, Push, Y)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x6e, BranchNotDirectDecrement)
|
|
|
|
op(0x6f, ReturnSubroutine)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x70, Branch, VF == 1)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x71, CallTable, 7)
|
|
|
|
op(0x72, AbsoluteBitSet, 3, false)
|
|
|
|
op(0x73, BranchBit, 3, false)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x74, DirectIndexedRead, fp(CMP), A, X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x75, AbsoluteIndexedRead, fp(CMP), X)
|
|
|
|
op(0x76, AbsoluteIndexedRead, fp(CMP), Y)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x77, IndirectIndexedRead, fp(CMP), Y)
|
Update to v103r06 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- processor/spc700: restored fetch/load/store/pull/push shorthand
functions
- processor/spc700: split functions that tested the algorithm used (`op
!= &SPC700:...`) to separate instructions
- mostly for code clarity over code size: it was awkward having
cycle counts change based on a function parameter
- processor/spc700: implemented Overload's new findings on which
cycles are truly internal (no bus reads)
- sfc/smp: TEST register emulation has been vastly improved¹
¹: it turns out that TEST.d4,d5 is the external clock divider (used
when accessing RAM through the DSP), and TEST.d6,d7 is the internal
clock divider (used when accessing IPLROM, IO registers, or during idle
cycles.)
The DSP (24576khz) feeds its clock / 12 through to the SMP (2048khz).
The clock divider setting further divides the clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Since 8 and 16 are not cleanly divislbe by 12, the SMP cycle count
glitches out and seems to take 10 and 2 clocks instead of 8 or 16. This
can on real hardware either cause the SMP to run very slowly, or more
likely, crash the SMP completely until reset.
What's even stranger is the timers aren't affected by this. They still
clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Note that technically I could divide my own clock counters by 24 and
reduce these to {1,2,5,10} and {1,2,4,8}, I instead chose to divide by
12 to better illustrate this hardware issue and better model that the
SMP clock runs at 2048khz and not 1024khz.
Further, note that things aren't 100% perfect yet. This seems to throw
off some tests, such as blargg's `test_timer_speed`. I can't tell how
far off I am because blargg's test tragically doesn't print out fail
values. But you can see the improvements in that higan is now passing
all of Revenant's tests that were obviously completely wrong before.
2017-07-03 07:24:47 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x78, DirectImmediateCompare, fp(CMP))
|
|
|
|
op(0x79, IndirectXCompareIndirectY, fp(CMP))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x7a, DirectReadWord, fp(ADW))
|
|
|
|
op(0x7b, DirectIndexedModify, fp(ROR), X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x7c, ImpliedModify, fp(ROR), A)
|
|
|
|
op(0x7d, Transfer, X, A)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x7e, DirectRead, fp(CMP), Y)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x7f, ReturnInterrupt)
|
|
|
|
op(0x80, FlagSet, CF, true)
|
|
|
|
op(0x81, CallTable, 8)
|
|
|
|
op(0x82, AbsoluteBitSet, 4, true)
|
|
|
|
op(0x83, BranchBit, 4, true)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x84, DirectRead, fp(ADC), A)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x85, AbsoluteRead, fp(ADC), A)
|
|
|
|
op(0x86, IndirectXRead, fp(ADC))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x87, IndexedIndirectRead, fp(ADC), X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x88, ImmediateRead, fp(ADC), A)
|
Update to v103r06 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- processor/spc700: restored fetch/load/store/pull/push shorthand
functions
- processor/spc700: split functions that tested the algorithm used (`op
!= &SPC700:...`) to separate instructions
- mostly for code clarity over code size: it was awkward having
cycle counts change based on a function parameter
- processor/spc700: implemented Overload's new findings on which
cycles are truly internal (no bus reads)
- sfc/smp: TEST register emulation has been vastly improved¹
¹: it turns out that TEST.d4,d5 is the external clock divider (used
when accessing RAM through the DSP), and TEST.d6,d7 is the internal
clock divider (used when accessing IPLROM, IO registers, or during idle
cycles.)
The DSP (24576khz) feeds its clock / 12 through to the SMP (2048khz).
The clock divider setting further divides the clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Since 8 and 16 are not cleanly divislbe by 12, the SMP cycle count
glitches out and seems to take 10 and 2 clocks instead of 8 or 16. This
can on real hardware either cause the SMP to run very slowly, or more
likely, crash the SMP completely until reset.
What's even stranger is the timers aren't affected by this. They still
clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Note that technically I could divide my own clock counters by 24 and
reduce these to {1,2,5,10} and {1,2,4,8}, I instead chose to divide by
12 to better illustrate this hardware issue and better model that the
SMP clock runs at 2048khz and not 1024khz.
Further, note that things aren't 100% perfect yet. This seems to throw
off some tests, such as blargg's `test_timer_speed`. I can't tell how
far off I am because blargg's test tragically doesn't print out fail
values. But you can see the improvements in that higan is now passing
all of Revenant's tests that were obviously completely wrong before.
2017-07-03 07:24:47 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x89, DirectDirectModify, fp(ADC))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x8a, AbsoluteBitModify, 4)
|
|
|
|
op(0x8b, DirectModify, fp(DEC))
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x8c, AbsoluteModify, fp(DEC))
|
|
|
|
op(0x8d, ImmediateRead, fp(LD), Y)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x8e, PullP)
|
Update to v103r06 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- processor/spc700: restored fetch/load/store/pull/push shorthand
functions
- processor/spc700: split functions that tested the algorithm used (`op
!= &SPC700:...`) to separate instructions
- mostly for code clarity over code size: it was awkward having
cycle counts change based on a function parameter
- processor/spc700: implemented Overload's new findings on which
cycles are truly internal (no bus reads)
- sfc/smp: TEST register emulation has been vastly improved¹
¹: it turns out that TEST.d4,d5 is the external clock divider (used
when accessing RAM through the DSP), and TEST.d6,d7 is the internal
clock divider (used when accessing IPLROM, IO registers, or during idle
cycles.)
The DSP (24576khz) feeds its clock / 12 through to the SMP (2048khz).
The clock divider setting further divides the clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Since 8 and 16 are not cleanly divislbe by 12, the SMP cycle count
glitches out and seems to take 10 and 2 clocks instead of 8 or 16. This
can on real hardware either cause the SMP to run very slowly, or more
likely, crash the SMP completely until reset.
What's even stranger is the timers aren't affected by this. They still
clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Note that technically I could divide my own clock counters by 24 and
reduce these to {1,2,5,10} and {1,2,4,8}, I instead chose to divide by
12 to better illustrate this hardware issue and better model that the
SMP clock runs at 2048khz and not 1024khz.
Further, note that things aren't 100% perfect yet. This seems to throw
off some tests, such as blargg's `test_timer_speed`. I can't tell how
far off I am because blargg's test tragically doesn't print out fail
values. But you can see the improvements in that higan is now passing
all of Revenant's tests that were obviously completely wrong before.
2017-07-03 07:24:47 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x8f, DirectImmediateWrite)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x90, Branch, CF == 0)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x91, CallTable, 9)
|
|
|
|
op(0x92, AbsoluteBitSet, 4, false)
|
|
|
|
op(0x93, BranchBit, 4, false)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x94, DirectIndexedRead, fp(ADC), A, X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x95, AbsoluteIndexedRead, fp(ADC), X)
|
|
|
|
op(0x96, AbsoluteIndexedRead, fp(ADC), Y)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x97, IndirectIndexedRead, fp(ADC), Y)
|
Update to v103r06 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- processor/spc700: restored fetch/load/store/pull/push shorthand
functions
- processor/spc700: split functions that tested the algorithm used (`op
!= &SPC700:...`) to separate instructions
- mostly for code clarity over code size: it was awkward having
cycle counts change based on a function parameter
- processor/spc700: implemented Overload's new findings on which
cycles are truly internal (no bus reads)
- sfc/smp: TEST register emulation has been vastly improved¹
¹: it turns out that TEST.d4,d5 is the external clock divider (used
when accessing RAM through the DSP), and TEST.d6,d7 is the internal
clock divider (used when accessing IPLROM, IO registers, or during idle
cycles.)
The DSP (24576khz) feeds its clock / 12 through to the SMP (2048khz).
The clock divider setting further divides the clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Since 8 and 16 are not cleanly divislbe by 12, the SMP cycle count
glitches out and seems to take 10 and 2 clocks instead of 8 or 16. This
can on real hardware either cause the SMP to run very slowly, or more
likely, crash the SMP completely until reset.
What's even stranger is the timers aren't affected by this. They still
clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Note that technically I could divide my own clock counters by 24 and
reduce these to {1,2,5,10} and {1,2,4,8}, I instead chose to divide by
12 to better illustrate this hardware issue and better model that the
SMP clock runs at 2048khz and not 1024khz.
Further, note that things aren't 100% perfect yet. This seems to throw
off some tests, such as blargg's `test_timer_speed`. I can't tell how
far off I am because blargg's test tragically doesn't print out fail
values. But you can see the improvements in that higan is now passing
all of Revenant's tests that were obviously completely wrong before.
2017-07-03 07:24:47 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x98, DirectImmediateModify, fp(ADC))
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x99, IndirectXWriteIndirectY, fp(ADC))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x9a, DirectReadWord, fp(SBW))
|
|
|
|
op(0x9b, DirectIndexedModify, fp(DEC), X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x9c, ImpliedModify, fp(DEC), A)
|
|
|
|
op(0x9d, Transfer, S, X)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0x9e, Divide)
|
|
|
|
op(0x9f, ExchangeNibble)
|
|
|
|
op(0xa0, FlagSet, IF, true)
|
|
|
|
op(0xa1, CallTable, 10)
|
|
|
|
op(0xa2, AbsoluteBitSet, 5, true)
|
|
|
|
op(0xa3, BranchBit, 5, true)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xa4, DirectRead, fp(SBC), A)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xa5, AbsoluteRead, fp(SBC), A)
|
|
|
|
op(0xa6, IndirectXRead, fp(SBC))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xa7, IndexedIndirectRead, fp(SBC), X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xa8, ImmediateRead, fp(SBC), A)
|
Update to v103r06 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- processor/spc700: restored fetch/load/store/pull/push shorthand
functions
- processor/spc700: split functions that tested the algorithm used (`op
!= &SPC700:...`) to separate instructions
- mostly for code clarity over code size: it was awkward having
cycle counts change based on a function parameter
- processor/spc700: implemented Overload's new findings on which
cycles are truly internal (no bus reads)
- sfc/smp: TEST register emulation has been vastly improved¹
¹: it turns out that TEST.d4,d5 is the external clock divider (used
when accessing RAM through the DSP), and TEST.d6,d7 is the internal
clock divider (used when accessing IPLROM, IO registers, or during idle
cycles.)
The DSP (24576khz) feeds its clock / 12 through to the SMP (2048khz).
The clock divider setting further divides the clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Since 8 and 16 are not cleanly divislbe by 12, the SMP cycle count
glitches out and seems to take 10 and 2 clocks instead of 8 or 16. This
can on real hardware either cause the SMP to run very slowly, or more
likely, crash the SMP completely until reset.
What's even stranger is the timers aren't affected by this. They still
clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Note that technically I could divide my own clock counters by 24 and
reduce these to {1,2,5,10} and {1,2,4,8}, I instead chose to divide by
12 to better illustrate this hardware issue and better model that the
SMP clock runs at 2048khz and not 1024khz.
Further, note that things aren't 100% perfect yet. This seems to throw
off some tests, such as blargg's `test_timer_speed`. I can't tell how
far off I am because blargg's test tragically doesn't print out fail
values. But you can see the improvements in that higan is now passing
all of Revenant's tests that were obviously completely wrong before.
2017-07-03 07:24:47 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xa9, DirectDirectModify, fp(SBC))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xaa, AbsoluteBitModify, 5)
|
|
|
|
op(0xab, DirectModify, fp(INC))
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xac, AbsoluteModify, fp(INC))
|
|
|
|
op(0xad, ImmediateRead, fp(CMP), Y)
|
|
|
|
op(0xae, Pull, A)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xaf, IndirectXIncrementWrite, A)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xb0, Branch, CF == 1)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xb1, CallTable, 11)
|
|
|
|
op(0xb2, AbsoluteBitSet, 5, false)
|
|
|
|
op(0xb3, BranchBit, 5, false)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xb4, DirectIndexedRead, fp(SBC), A, X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xb5, AbsoluteIndexedRead, fp(SBC), X)
|
|
|
|
op(0xb6, AbsoluteIndexedRead, fp(SBC), Y)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xb7, IndirectIndexedRead, fp(SBC), Y)
|
Update to v103r06 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- processor/spc700: restored fetch/load/store/pull/push shorthand
functions
- processor/spc700: split functions that tested the algorithm used (`op
!= &SPC700:...`) to separate instructions
- mostly for code clarity over code size: it was awkward having
cycle counts change based on a function parameter
- processor/spc700: implemented Overload's new findings on which
cycles are truly internal (no bus reads)
- sfc/smp: TEST register emulation has been vastly improved¹
¹: it turns out that TEST.d4,d5 is the external clock divider (used
when accessing RAM through the DSP), and TEST.d6,d7 is the internal
clock divider (used when accessing IPLROM, IO registers, or during idle
cycles.)
The DSP (24576khz) feeds its clock / 12 through to the SMP (2048khz).
The clock divider setting further divides the clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Since 8 and 16 are not cleanly divislbe by 12, the SMP cycle count
glitches out and seems to take 10 and 2 clocks instead of 8 or 16. This
can on real hardware either cause the SMP to run very slowly, or more
likely, crash the SMP completely until reset.
What's even stranger is the timers aren't affected by this. They still
clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Note that technically I could divide my own clock counters by 24 and
reduce these to {1,2,5,10} and {1,2,4,8}, I instead chose to divide by
12 to better illustrate this hardware issue and better model that the
SMP clock runs at 2048khz and not 1024khz.
Further, note that things aren't 100% perfect yet. This seems to throw
off some tests, such as blargg's `test_timer_speed`. I can't tell how
far off I am because blargg's test tragically doesn't print out fail
values. But you can see the improvements in that higan is now passing
all of Revenant's tests that were obviously completely wrong before.
2017-07-03 07:24:47 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xb8, DirectImmediateModify, fp(SBC))
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xb9, IndirectXWriteIndirectY, fp(SBC))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xba, DirectReadWord, fp(LDW))
|
|
|
|
op(0xbb, DirectIndexedModify, fp(INC), X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xbc, ImpliedModify, fp(INC), A)
|
|
|
|
op(0xbd, Transfer, X, S)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xbe, DecimalAdjustSub)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xbf, IndirectXIncrementRead, A)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xc0, FlagSet, IF, false)
|
|
|
|
op(0xc1, CallTable, 12)
|
|
|
|
op(0xc2, AbsoluteBitSet, 6, true)
|
|
|
|
op(0xc3, BranchBit, 6, true)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xc4, DirectWrite, A)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xc5, AbsoluteWrite, A)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xc6, IndirectXWrite, A)
|
|
|
|
op(0xc7, IndexedIndirectWrite, A, X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xc8, ImmediateRead, fp(CMP), X)
|
|
|
|
op(0xc9, AbsoluteWrite, X)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xca, AbsoluteBitModify, 6)
|
|
|
|
op(0xcb, DirectWrite, Y)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xcc, AbsoluteWrite, Y)
|
|
|
|
op(0xcd, ImmediateRead, fp(LD), X)
|
|
|
|
op(0xce, Pull, X)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xcf, Multiply)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xd0, Branch, ZF == 0)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xd1, CallTable, 13)
|
|
|
|
op(0xd2, AbsoluteBitSet, 6, false)
|
|
|
|
op(0xd3, BranchBit, 6, false)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xd4, DirectIndexedWrite, A, X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xd5, AbsoluteIndexedWrite, X)
|
|
|
|
op(0xd6, AbsoluteIndexedWrite, Y)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xd7, IndirectIndexedWrite, A, Y)
|
|
|
|
op(0xd8, DirectWrite, X)
|
|
|
|
op(0xd9, DirectIndexedWrite, X, Y)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xda, DirectWriteWord)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xdb, DirectIndexedWrite, Y, X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xdc, ImpliedModify, fp(DEC), Y)
|
|
|
|
op(0xdd, Transfer, Y, A)
|
Update to v103r07 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- gba/cpu: massive code cleanup effort
- gba/cpu: DMA can run in between active instructions¹
- gba/cpu: added two-cycle startup delay between DMA activation and
DMA transfers²
- processor/spc700: BBC, BBC, CBNE cycle 4 is an idle cycle
- processor/spc700: ADDW, SUBW, MOVW (read) cycle 4 is an idle cycle
¹: unfortunately, this causes yet another performance penalty for the
poor GBA core =( Also, I think I may have missed disabling DMAs while
the CPU is stopped. I'll fix that in the next WIP.
²: I put the waiting counter decrement at the wrong place, so this
doesn't actually work. Needs to be more like
this:
auto CPU::step(uint clocks) -> void {
for(auto _ : range(clocks)) {
for(auto& timer : this->timer) timer.run();
for(auto& dma : this->dma) if(dma.active && dma.waiting) dma.waiting--;
context.clock++;
}
...
auto CPU::DMA::run() -> bool {
if(cpu.stopped() || !active || waiting) return false;
transfer();
if(irq) cpu.irq.flag |= CPU::Interrupt::DMA0 << id;
if(drq && id == 3) cpu.irq.flag |= CPU::Interrupt::Cartridge;
return true;
}
Of course, the real fix will be restructuring how DMA works, so that
it's always running in parallel with the CPU instead of this weird
design where it tries to run all channels in some kind of loop until no
channels are active anymore whenever one channel is activated.
Not really sure how to design that yet, however.
2017-07-05 05:29:27 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xde, BranchNotDirectIndexed, X)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xdf, DecimalAdjustAdd)
|
|
|
|
op(0xe0, OverflowClear)
|
|
|
|
op(0xe1, CallTable, 14)
|
|
|
|
op(0xe2, AbsoluteBitSet, 7, true)
|
|
|
|
op(0xe3, BranchBit, 7, true)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xe4, DirectRead, fp(LD), A)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xe5, AbsoluteRead, fp(LD), A)
|
|
|
|
op(0xe6, IndirectXRead, fp(LD))
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xe7, IndexedIndirectRead, fp(LD), X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xe8, ImmediateRead, fp(LD), A)
|
|
|
|
op(0xe9, AbsoluteRead, fp(LD), X)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xea, AbsoluteBitModify, 7)
|
|
|
|
op(0xeb, DirectRead, fp(LD), Y)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xec, AbsoluteRead, fp(LD), Y)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xed, ComplementCarry)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xee, Pull, Y)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xef, Wait)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xf0, Branch, ZF == 1)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xf1, CallTable, 15)
|
|
|
|
op(0xf2, AbsoluteBitSet, 7, false)
|
|
|
|
op(0xf3, BranchBit, 7, false)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xf4, DirectIndexedRead, fp(LD), A, X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xf5, AbsoluteIndexedRead, fp(LD), X)
|
|
|
|
op(0xf6, AbsoluteIndexedRead, fp(LD), Y)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xf7, IndirectIndexedRead, fp(LD), Y)
|
|
|
|
op(0xf8, DirectRead, fp(LD), X)
|
|
|
|
op(0xf9, DirectIndexedRead, fp(LD), X, Y)
|
Update to v103r06 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- processor/spc700: restored fetch/load/store/pull/push shorthand
functions
- processor/spc700: split functions that tested the algorithm used (`op
!= &SPC700:...`) to separate instructions
- mostly for code clarity over code size: it was awkward having
cycle counts change based on a function parameter
- processor/spc700: implemented Overload's new findings on which
cycles are truly internal (no bus reads)
- sfc/smp: TEST register emulation has been vastly improved¹
¹: it turns out that TEST.d4,d5 is the external clock divider (used
when accessing RAM through the DSP), and TEST.d6,d7 is the internal
clock divider (used when accessing IPLROM, IO registers, or during idle
cycles.)
The DSP (24576khz) feeds its clock / 12 through to the SMP (2048khz).
The clock divider setting further divides the clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Since 8 and 16 are not cleanly divislbe by 12, the SMP cycle count
glitches out and seems to take 10 and 2 clocks instead of 8 or 16. This
can on real hardware either cause the SMP to run very slowly, or more
likely, crash the SMP completely until reset.
What's even stranger is the timers aren't affected by this. They still
clock by 2, 4, 8, or 16.
Note that technically I could divide my own clock counters by 24 and
reduce these to {1,2,5,10} and {1,2,4,8}, I instead chose to divide by
12 to better illustrate this hardware issue and better model that the
SMP clock runs at 2048khz and not 1024khz.
Further, note that things aren't 100% perfect yet. This seems to throw
off some tests, such as blargg's `test_timer_speed`. I can't tell how
far off I am because blargg's test tragically doesn't print out fail
values. But you can see the improvements in that higan is now passing
all of Revenant's tests that were obviously completely wrong before.
2017-07-03 07:24:47 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xfa, DirectDirectWrite)
|
2017-06-27 01:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xfb, DirectIndexedRead, fp(LD), Y, X)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xfc, ImpliedModify, fp(INC), Y)
|
|
|
|
op(0xfd, Transfer, A, Y)
|
Update to v103r03 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/psg: fixed output frequency rate regression from v103r02
- processor/m68k: fixed calculations for ABCD, NBCD, SBCD [hex\_usr,
SuperMikeMan]
- processor/spc700: renamed abbreviated instructions to functional
descriptions (eg `XCN` → `ExchangeNibble`)
- processor/spc700: removed memory.cpp shorthand functions (fetch,
load, store, pull, push)
- processor/spc700: updated all instructions to follow cycle behavior
as documented by Overload with a logic analyzer
Once again, the changes to the SPC700 core are really quite massive. And
this time it's not just cosmetic: the idle cycles have been updated to
pull from various memory addresses. This is why I removed the shorthand
functions -- so that I could handle the at-times very bizarre addresses
the SPC700 has on its address bus during its idle cycles.
There is one behavior Overload mentioned that I don't emulate ... one of
the cycles of the (X) transfer functions seems to not actually access
the $f0-ff internal SMP registers? I don't fully understand what
Overload is getting at, so I haven't tried to support it just yet.
Also, there are limits to logic analyzers. In many cases the same
address is read from twice consecutively. It is unclear which of the two
reads the SPC700 actually utilizes. I tried to choose the most logical
values (usually the first one), but ... I don't know that we'll be able
to figure this one out. It's going to be virtually impossible to test
this through software, because the PC can't really execute out of
registers that have side effects on reads.
2017-06-28 07:24:46 +00:00
|
|
|
op(0xfe, BranchNotYDecrement)
|
|
|
|
op(0xff, Stop)
|
Update to v102r26 release.
byuu says:
Changelog:
- md/ym2612: initialize DAC sample to center volume [Cydrak]
- processor/arm: add accumulate mode extra cycle to mlal [Jonas
Quinn]
- processor/huc6280: split off algorithms, improve naming of functions
- processor/mos6502: split off algorithms
- processor/spc700: major revamp of entire core (~50% completed)
- processor/wdc65816: fixed several bugs introduced by rewrite
For the SPC700, this turns out to be very old code as well, with global
object state variables, those annoying `{Boolean,Natural}BitField` types,
`under_case` naming conventions, heavily abbreviated function names, etc.
I'm working to get the code to be in the same design as the MOS6502,
HuC6280, WDC65816 cores, since they're all extremely similar in terms of
architectural design (the SPC700 is more of an off-label
reimplementation of a 6502 core, but still.)
The main thing left is that about 90% of the actual instructions still
need to be adapted to not use the internal state (`aa`, `rd`, `dp`,
`sp`, `bit` variables.) I wanted to finish this today, but ran out of
time before work.
I wouldn't suggest too much testing just yet. We should wait until the
SPC700 core is finished for that. However, if some does want to and
spots regressions, please let me know.
2017-06-16 00:06:17 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#undef op
|
|
|
|
#undef fp
|