Difference between LEA and MOVE.L?

Question

Are there any differences between

LEA $1000,A0

and

MOVE #$1000,A0

to put an address in the address registry?

Answer 1

In this case, there will be no observable difference (unlike the accepted answer claims - the MOVE example will assemble as MOVEA which does not alter the CCR, see M68K Reference Manual Pg 4-116 to 4-120).

Answer 2

The lea instruction does not affect flags, where the move instruction does. Specifically Z and C will be cleared after the move #$1000,a0.

Answer 3

Durandal is correct, operations involving an address register have generally no impact on the processor flags, in this particular case the two instructions will behave the same and take the exact same cpu time (8 cycles using short addressing mode or 12 using long mode).

MOVE xx,an is not a real instruction, it's something assemblers allow but if you look at the disassembled result you will see that that the actual instruction is MOVEA.

Answer 4

The motivation of having LEA, instead of only MOVE, is that LEA gives access to the result of the address calculation based on the different addressing modes.

The MOVE #$1000,A0 instruction moves the immediate $1000 into the A0 register, since the immediate indication "#" is used in the mnemonic. The LEA $1000,A0 instruction points to the memory address $1000, and loads this address into the A0 register. In this simple example, the result is the same, and it looks like it is just a matter of some simple syntax with the missing immediate indication "#".

What LEA actually does may be easier to understand when looking at the difference in:

LEA (A0),A1

and:

MOVE (A0),A1

With LEA (A0),A1, the A1 register is loaded with the A0 value, like A1 := A0, where the MOVE (A0),A1 loads the word (default size) value from the memory location in the A0 register, sign extend the value to long (always entire register for address registers) and saves the value in the A1 register.

So LEA provides the address result from the address calculation before the address is used to actually make a memory access. This is also why there isn't any LEA #<data> format (addressing mode), since the address of the #<data> would be in the program space (PC relative), since immediate data is part of the instruction.

The real strength in LEA is apparent when when more complex addressing modes are used, where it would require significant code to calculate the address otherwise.

So the actual difference on LEA and MOVE in the original question can better be illustrated with this illegal code for address register destination (possible for data register destination):

LEA ($1000),A0

and:

MOVE #$1000,A0

This more clearly shows that LEA provides the address of the indirection, without actually doing the memory access.

Answer 5

When I was learning how to program in assembly language (68k) there was a difference pointed out in regards to this example of LEA and MOVE.L when it comes to dealing with Address Registers. In terms of using labels there is definitely a major difference.

Say you have a label Foo for some DC.*.

LEA Foo, A0       ;Loads Foo into Address Register A0

MOVE.L #Foo, A0   ;Loads Foo into Address Register A0

The lesson was that under normal conditions, the above two instructions would in fact accomplish the same thing. However, due to "relocatability" in real-life systems, the bottom one can cause problems.

It is safest to just use the LEA approach. Whether or not there can be an issue when using $1000 - I am not sure on. However, to talk about the difference between this LEA and MOVE.L when dealing with Address Registers this is definitely something that has to be considered.