[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Tinycc-devel] lcall invalid hex code
From: |
Michael Matz |
Subject: |
Re: [Tinycc-devel] lcall invalid hex code |
Date: |
Tue, 3 May 2016 01:20:10 +0200 (CEST) |
User-agent: |
Alpine 2.20 (LSU 67 2015-01-07) |
Hi,
On Tue, 3 May 2016, Michael Matz wrote:
Not really. It does work-around the above problem, but at the expense
of not using the one-byte opcode 0x90+reg anymore, even if possible.
Generally the opcode in i386-asm.h are sorted by some sort of preference
(e.g. first the one-byte opcodes for nops, then the more capable
two-byte opcodes for general xchg). Something isn't right in the
i386-asm.c opcode parser/selector. It should reject the first ("xchgw")
alternative if presented with byte-registers. I'll take a look.
Fixed in mob, plus some more asm bugs (32 and 64 bit).
Ciao,
Michael.
- [Tinycc-devel] lcall invalid hex code, Sergey Korshunoff, 2016/05/01
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] lcall invalid hex code, David Mertens, 2016/05/01
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] lcall invalid hex code, Sergey Korshunoff, 2016/05/01
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] lcall invalid hex code, Sergey Korshunoff, 2016/05/01
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] lcall invalid hex code, Michael Matz, 2016/05/01
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] lcall invalid hex code, Sergey Korshunoff, 2016/05/02
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] lcall invalid hex code, Sergey Korshunoff, 2016/05/02
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] lcall invalid hex code, Michael Matz, 2016/05/02
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] lcall invalid hex code, Michael Matz, 2016/05/02
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] lcall invalid hex code,
Michael Matz <=
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] lcall invalid hex code, Sergey Korshunoff, 2016/05/02
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] lcall invalid hex code, Michael Matz, 2016/05/02
Re: [Tinycc-devel] lcall invalid hex code, Michael Matz, 2016/05/01