
68000 instruction test suite QL
- mk79
- QL Wafer Drive
- Posts: 1349
- Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 10:54 am
- Location: Esslingen/Germany
- Contact:
Re: 68000 instruction test suite QL
I guess it should be quite a bit less, I re-tested QPC yesterday and it only took 30 minutes... much faster than I remembered (mostly used it on MiSTer a few years ago which took quite a bit longer...). I checked the screenshot timestamps to get the duration 

- XorA
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1582
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 11:31 am
- Location: Shotts, North Lanarkshire, Scotland, UK
Re: 68000 instruction test suite QL
I did not think of that, 11:48->13:05mk79 wrote:I guess it should be quite a bit less, I re-tested QPC yesterday and it only took 30 minutes... much faster than I remembered (mostly used it on MiSTer a few years ago which took quite a bit longer...). I checked the screenshot timestamps to get the duration

Re: 68000 instruction test suite QL
Interesting. Probably need to fix the same in Q-emuLator, then.XorA wrote:It seems I could use your testsuite, as the following code from uqlx I guess means its nbcd instruction does not work.
Note the shifting d all 8 bits, then checking for a value > 0Code: Select all
IDECL(nbcd) { w8 d,r; w8 d2,r2; d=ModifyAtEA_b((code>>3)&7,code&7); d2=((d&0x0f)>9? 9:(d&0x0f)); d>>=8; if(d>9) d2+=90; else d2+=d*10; carry=d2!=0; r2=100-d2; if(xflag) r2--; xflag=carry; zero=zero && r2==0; r=(r2%10)+((r2/10)<<4); RewriteEA_b(r); NEXT; }
Re: 68000 instruction test suite QL
Looks like I had already fixed NBCD in Q-emuLator for the general case, but there was still an issue when the input value was $FA.M68008 wrote: Interesting. Probably need to fix the same in Q-emuLator, then.
- XorA
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1582
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 11:31 am
- Location: Shotts, North Lanarkshire, Scotland, UK
Re: 68000 instruction test suite QL
Ace, look forward to the new release. (I had not got round to running full testsuite on Q-Emulator).M68008 wrote:Looks like I had already fixed NBCD in Q-emuLator for the general case, but there was still an issue when the input value was $FA.M68008 wrote: Interesting. Probably need to fix the same in Q-emuLator, then.