| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: X86_emulate.c: Shouldn't opcodes like single byte 89 hav
On 5 Jun 2006, at 21:58, Petersson, Mats wrote:
'm trying to figure out why I see a READ followed by a WRITE on
opcode-stream of 66 89 07, which translates to
mov %ax,(%edi)
It looks like entry 0x89 in the single byte table doesn't have the Mov
bit set... So I'm wondering if I'm reading things wrong, or if this
should have a Mov bit...
I'm also wondering about entry 0x8F in the same table - it's got a Mov
prefix, but according to my opcode-table in AMD64 Architecture
Programmers Manual, Vol 3, Rev 3.11, this is a POP instructuion. Opcode
0x8E is a Mov instruction... Is this a "oops, wrong box", or something
else?
I added the Mov flag near the end of writing the emulator, and never
went back and added it to all the obvious entries. I'll add it for the
MOV variants I missed.
-- Keir
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home