Received: (from major@localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA03564
	for pups-liszt; Wed, 8 Sep 1999 11:03:51 +1000 (EST)
Received: from caveman.geac.com.au (caveman.geac.com.au [203.30.73.2])
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA03558
	for <pups@minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au>; Wed, 8 Sep 1999 11:03:40 +1000 (EST)
Received: (qmail 4832 invoked from network); 8 Sep 1999 11:21:32 +1000
Received: from trowel.geac.com.au (203.1.26.189)
  by caveman.geac.com.au with SMTP; 8 Sep 1999 11:21:32 +1000
Received: (qmail 27748 invoked from network); 8 Sep 1999 11:29:48 +1000
Received: from fgh.geac.com.au (202.6.67.163)
  by trowel.geac.com.au with SMTP; 8 Sep 1999 11:29:49 +1000
Received: from localhost (dave@localhost) 
    by fgh.geac.com.au?r with ESMTP id LAA21756
    for <pups@minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au>; Wed, 8 Sep 1999 11:15:48 +1000
X-Envelope-From: dave@horsfall.org
X-Envelope-To: <pups@minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au>
X-Authentication-Warning: fgh.geac.com.au: dave owned process doing -bs
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 11:15:48 +1000 (EST)
From: Dave Horsfall <dave@fgh.geac.com.au>
X-Sender: dave@fgh
To: PDP Unix Preservation Society <pups@minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Diff between 11/20 and 11/45?
In-Reply-To: <199909070604.XAA04723@mpl.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.9909081103330.19899-100000@fgh>
X-No-Archive: Yes
X-Witty-Saying: "Tesseract - Enter at own risk"
X-Disclaimer: "Me, speak for us?"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 6 Sep 1999, Carl Lowenstein wrote:

> The first genuine user-mode difference that I remember coming across was
> an incompatibility in the result of
> 
> 	MOV SP, -(SP)

Anything involving the same register as src and dst in this way was,
err, different...

And I have an annotation that the JSR does not behave as documented.
Unlike page 91, the sequence is not (tmp) <- (dst) / v(SP) <- reg /
reg <- PC / PC <- (tmp).  The first ISP code is not present i.e. the
SP is decremented first, not saved, and the last is PC <- (dst).

> It isn't really clear to me why one would want to use this particular
> instruction, however it turned out to hang both BASIC and FOCAL at the
> time.  A zero-length patch wasn't too hard to figure out.

Some sort of frame pointer linking, on an architecture that didn't
have separate frame pointers (like the Vax)?

-- 
Dave Horsfall VK2KFU  dave@geac.com.au  Ph: +61 2 9978-7493 Fx: +61 2 9978-7422
Geac Computers P/L (FGH Division) 2/57 Christie St, St Leonards 2065, Australia


