This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] i386-dis: fix decoding of reserved "prefetch" encodings

On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Roland McGrath <> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 10:34 AM, H.J. Lu <> wrote:
>> Those are marked as NOPs in AMD manual and reserved in Intel
>> manual.  I don't like "prefetch(bad)".  I can live with "nop/reserved".
> Can you cite the manuals you are looking at?
> I'm looking at
> on page 254:
>         The reserved PREFETCH types do not result in an invalid-opcode
>         exception if executed.  Instead, for forward compatibility with
>         future processors that may implement additional forms of the
>         PREFETCH instruction, all reserved PREFETCH types are implemented
>         as synonyms of the basic PREFETCH type (the PREFETCH instruction
>         with type 000b).
> That says they are prefetch, not nop.  That's for the 0f 0d set.
> For 0f 18, the same AMD manual's Table A-7 (page 430, in the "Group 16"
> row) says "NOP[4]" for these excess encodings but the footnote is:
>         4. Reserved prefetch encodings are aliases to the /0 encoding
>            (PREFETCH Exclusive) for future compatibility.
> So these Intel reserved opcodes are in fact also prefetch on AMD, not nop,
> despite the appearance of "NOP" in the table grid.
> So it seems to me the mnemonic ought to have "prefetch" in it somewhere.
> How about "prefetch/reserved"?

Since it is marked as NOP in AMD table, I prefer nop.  As for aliasing
to PREFETCH Exclusive.  It is just an implementation detail.  A future
processor may alias them to a different NOP, not necessarily
PREFETCH Exclusive.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]