Don't believe everything written in Wikipedia. I don't have any personal experience with the SEC, but that Wiki quote doesn't make much sense to me. I mean, it is basically correct. But the changes they mention were introduced in the 68010, certainly not in the 68EC000. I can't be 100% sure about the SEC, but I still highly doubt it. Having said that ...exxos wrote: ↑Tue Mar 22, 2022 8:40 pm All I can find is this on wiki.. Whatever it means.
The 68000 does not meet the Popek and Goldberg virtualization requirements for full processor virtualization because it has a single unprivileged instruction, "MOVE from SR", which allows user-mode software read-only access to a small amount of privileged state. The 68EC000 and 68SEC000, which are later derivatives of the 68000, do meet the requirements as the "MOVE from SR" instruction is privileged. The same change was introduced on the 68010 and later CPUs.
That's what Motorola documentation claims. But don't believe everything the manufacturer claims either Again, I don't have personal experience with the SEC, but I understand it has some minor incompatibilities in some undocumented aspects of the 68K. This would affect mostly copy protections, and may be some demos.IIRC the SEC was supposed to be 100% code compatible, but wiki says otherwise
Is there a fallback to a "normal" 68K? As long as there is a fallback, then no harm is done. Otherwise, it might still be good enough for some (most) people. As exxos is saying, in the worst case it is still much more compatible than a 020 or 030 CPU.