This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [patches] Re: x86-64 gas part II
On Thu, Dec 21, 2000 at 10:29:20AM +1100, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2000, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>
> > + {"rex", 0, 0x40, X, Cpu64, NoSuf|IsPrefix, { 0, 0, 0} },
> > + {"rexz", 0, 0x41, X, Cpu64, NoSuf|IsPrefix, { 0, 0, 0} },
>
> Do these "rex" prefixes actually appear in instructions? ie. Does it make
> sense to accept a line like " rex mov ..."? If not, then these prefixes
> shouldn't be in the table.
It makes sense for some instructions like iret or sysret, which change their
operation then, but these could as well be specified with a 'q' suffix.
-Andi (who is glad that a real problem was found after this useful K&R discussion)