On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 01:19:51PM -0700, Matt Turner wrote: > I'm not sure of the interpretation that LDA counts as a memory access. > > The manual says it's Ra <- Rbv + SEXT(disp). > > It's not touching memory that I can see. More to the point, the same manual gives explicit list of instructions that shouldn't occur between LDx_L and STx_C, and LDA does not belong to any of those. I suspect that Will has misparsed the notations in there - LDx is present in the list, but it's _not_ "all instructions with mnemonics starting with LD", just the 4 "load integer from memory" ones. FWIW, instructions with that encoding (x01xxx<a:5><b:5><offs:16>) are grouped so: LDAx - LDA, LDAH; load address LDx - LDL, LDQ, LDBU, LDWU; load memory data into integer register LDQ_U; load unaligned LDx_L - LDL_L, LDQ_L; load locked STx_C - STL_C, STQ_C; store conditional STx - STL, STQ, STB, STW; store STQ_U; store unaligned They all have the same encoding, naturally enough (operation/register/address representation), but that's it... See section 4.2 in reference manual for details; relevant note follows discussion of LDx_L and it spells the list out. LDx is present, LDAx isn't (and neither is LDA by itself). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-alpha" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
