At 16:20 -0400 on 08/06/2011, Bob Rutledge wrote about Re: Suffix of
long-displacement instructions:
Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
Bob,
Thank you for your supporting voice and verification. I didn't see
your reply until I had already replied to Tom.
You're welcome.
If the OP's question is restated with the right instructions, it
might be of interest to peruse the instruction lists to see how many
of the long-displacement instructions kept their "normal"
counterparts' opcodes in their last 8 bits, e.g.
L, LY :58, E358
N, NY :54, E354
Bob
Given that E3xx seems to be the opcode for Long-Displacement (and I
do not think E3 was allocated as an opcode before this feature was
introduced), I see no reason why all of the Long-Displacement
instructions would/could not use the normal opcode as their 2nd byte.
This mapping could also apply to other 2 byte versions although if
the first byte is used for another feature, this could not be done
(ie: Since the 64-bit Grande instructions also use E3xx and the xx is
used for zzY instructions it is not available for the zzG ones which
use other xx codes).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
