Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 v7 ucbopal-1.9 BSD 4.2; site ucbopal.CC.Berkeley.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!ucbvax!ucbtopaz!ucbopal!edmoy
From: edmoy@ucbopal.CC.Berkeley.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.micro.mac
Subject: Re:Re: high byte of address question
Message-ID: <228@ucbopal.CC.Berkeley.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 19-Jan-85 16:10:13 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbopal.228
Posted: Sat Jan 19 16:10:13 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 21-Jan-85 02:28:51 EST
Organization: Univ. of Calif., Berkeley CA USA
Lines: 19

>The reason the high byte gets trashed in SumacC code has nothing to do
>with the Mac hardware, but instead is a side-effect of the Sumacc
>relocation scheme.

You are quite correct about sumacc method, which I am aware of.  My question
had to do with the 68000 Load Effective Address (lea) instruction itself.
When I wrote some assembly language code to support my C code, it seemed
that the lea instruction itself was putting something in the high byte.
So after I did a lea to an address register and then moved it to a data
register, I found I had to clear the high byte to use it the way I wanted
or otherwise the high byte would screw things up.

Edward Moy
Computing Services
University of California
Berkeley, CA  94720

edmoy@ucbopal.ARPA
ucbvax!ucbopal!edmoy