Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "jnel".
Did you mean:
jne
2013 Jul 14
2
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] x86/asm: avoid mnemonics without type suffix
...tion". For
example, think about branch offsets and immediates. Most architectures
have some limits about how long branch offsets or immediates are, and
a short branch offset may use TOTALLY DIFFERENT instruction encoding
than a long branch offset.
Do you really expect that the user says "jnel" for the long form of
the "jne" instruction? And "jnes" if you want the
smaller/faster/simpler 8-bit version?
No sane person actually wants that, and no modern assembler does that
(although I can remember ones that did - ugh). You write "jne target"
and depend on...
2013 Jul 14
2
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] x86/asm: avoid mnemonics without type suffix
Hi,
The issue perhaps wasn't explained ideally (and possibly shouldn't
have been CCed directly to you either, so apologies, but now that
there *is* a discussion...)
> Try some actual relevant test instead:
>
> bt %eax,mem
> bt %rax,mem
>
> and notice how they are actually fundamentally different. Test-case:
I'm coming at this from the compiler side, where the