Retro/pcjs
Watch
1
0
Fork
You've already forked pcjs
 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Corrected frame size for 32-bit INT gates, fixed BT/BTC/BTR/BTS instructions for bit indexes > 31, and disabled the Debugger's IF clear warning when IOPL < CPL

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Jeff Parsons 2015-09-03 18:47:40 -07:00
commit 3f52d18182
5 changed files with 191 additions and 21 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

12
modules/pcjs/lib/x86op0f.js
View file

@ -1128,7 +1128,7 @@ X86.opPOPFS = function POPFS()
*/
X86.opBT = function BT()
{
this.aOpModMemWord[this.getIPByte()].call(this, X86.fnBT);
this.aOpModMemWord[this.getIPByte()].call(this, X86.fnBTMem);
if (this.regEA !== X86.ADDR_INVALID) this.nStepCycles -= 6;
};
@ -1195,7 +1195,7 @@ X86.opPOPGS = function POPGS()
*/
X86.opBTS = function BTS()
{
this.aOpModMemWord[this.getIPByte()].call(this, X86.fnBTS);
this.aOpModMemWord[this.getIPByte()].call(this, X86.fnBTSMem);
if (this.regEA !== X86.ADDR_INVALID) this.nStepCycles -= 5;
};
@ -1260,7 +1260,7 @@ X86.opLSS = function LSS()
*/
X86.opBTR = function BTR()
{
this.aOpModMemWord[this.getIPByte()].call(this, X86.fnBTR);
this.aOpModMemWord[this.getIPByte()].call(this, X86.fnBTRMem);
if (this.regEA !== X86.ADDR_INVALID) this.nStepCycles -= 5;
};
@ -1424,7 +1424,7 @@ X86.opGRP8 = function GRP8()
*/
X86.opBTC = function BTC()
{
this.aOpModMemWord[this.getIPByte()].call(this, X86.fnBTC);
this.aOpModMemWord[this.getIPByte()].call(this, X86.fnBTCMem);
if (this.regEA !== X86.ADDR_INVALID) this.nStepCycles -= 5;
};
@ -1602,8 +1602,8 @@ X86.aOps0F[0xA6] = X86.opInvalid;
/*
* When Windows 95 Setup initializes in protected-mode, it sets a DPMI exception handler for UD_FAULT and
* then attempts to generate that exception with undefined opcode 0x0F,0xFF. Apparently, whoever wrote that code
* (davidw?) didn't get the Intel memo regarding the preferred invalid opcode (0x0F,0x0B, aka UD2), or perhaps Intel
* hadn't written that memo yet -- although if that's the case, then Intel should have followed Microsoft's lead and
* didn't get the Intel memo regarding the preferred invalid opcode (0x0F,0x0B, aka UD2), or perhaps Intel hadn't
* written that memo yet -- although if that's the case, then Intel should have followed Microsoft's lead and
* selected 0x0F,0xFF instead of 0x0F,0x0B.
*
* In any case, this means we need to explicitly set the handler for that opcode to opInvalid(), too.