[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [Xen-devel] X86_emulate.c: Shouldn't opcodes like single byte 89 have "Mov" modifier?
I'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? Any thoughts? -- Mats _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |