Re: [MI400] Problem with the UNDEL utlity under V5R3

[Dave McKenzie <davemck@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Scott,

No, register 23 is correct.

The point of the patch is to load the 8-byte virtual address contained
in the field PADDR into the Machine Space Pointer SRCMSP, so it can be
used to copy data from that address.

Instruction 1F8 loads the address of ADDR (a dummy field) into SRCMSP,
but 1F9 will be patched to load the *contents* of PADDR into SRCMSP.
That will wipe out the address just loaded by 1F8, but that's OK.  1F8
doesn't do anything useful -- I put it there just to show the location
of the SRCMSP field (offset xC8 from the address contained in register 1).

The machine instruction at 003758 loads the contents of the PADDR field
into register 23.  After the patch, instruction 00375C will store that
into SRCMSP.

--Dave

Hallett Scott wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> I'm just double checking before I try to resolve the same problem ...
>
> You wrote ...
>
> > The new instruction SHOULD be:
> >
> >     00375C   FAE100C8   STD 23,0XC8(1)
>
> taken that the dump is ...
>
> > > The dump for 1F8 (the SETSPP) and 1F9 (the CPYBLA) should look something
> > > like this (ignoring the 2 address columns at the left):
> > >
> > >  003750   3B1FFE48   ADDI 24,31,-440        1F8
> > >  003754   FB0100C8   STD 24,0XC8(1)
> > >  003758   EAFFFE30   LD 23,0XFE30(31)       1F9
> > >  00375C   FAFFFE48   STD 23,0XFE48(31
>
> ... shouldn't the new instruction be ... FAE100C8   STD 24,0XC8(1) ... ?
>
> Thanks
> Scott