https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16891
H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC| |hjl.tools at gmail dot com
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|--- |2.25
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Russ Cox from comment #1)
> Here are some related cases. They may be caused by something slightly
> different, since FWAIT is so special, but it didn't seem worth filing a new
> bug.
Fixed in 2.25.
> The format is: <hex bytes>: <correct answer> vs <libopcodes output>. I am
> claiming to know the <correct answer> because libopcodes is choosing to
> treat the instruction as a single byte. If so, I believe that it should
> describe the first input byte.
>
> 66 67 ad 66 77 88 00 00: data16 vs addr16
> 66 f0 5f 66 77 88 00 00: data16 vs lock
> f2 66 67 f0 0f 11 22 00: repnz vs data16
> f2 67 ad 66 77 88 00 00: repnz vs addr16
> f2 f0 36 66 67 0f 11 22: repnz vs lock
> f3 66 67 f0 0f 11 22 00: repz vs data16
> f3 67 ad 66 77 88 00 00: repz vs addr16
> f3 f0 5f 66 77 88 00 00: repz vs lock
> f3 f2 5f 66 77 88 00 00: repz vs repnz
Please open a new bug report for each different case and be specific.
For example, with 66 67 ad 66 77 88 00 00, I got
0: 66 67 ad lods %ds:(%si),%ax
3: 66 data16
4: 77 88 ja 0xffffff8e
Which data16 are you referring to?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
