[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] Bug report about x86 'bt' insn
From: |
Torbjorn Granlund |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] Bug report about x86 'bt' insn |
Date: |
Wed, 10 Nov 2010 15:38:27 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.3 (berkeley-unix) |
malc <address@hidden> writes:
All is the keyword here, i doubt that exhaustive search was performed
furthermore, AMDs documentation (to the best of my knowledge still)
still maintains that ZF is undefined.
AMD indeed still says undefined in their documentation (as of two hours
ago). I have asked AMD for a clarification, mainly to make sure they
are aware of Intel's documentation change.
(I am not certain about what you doubt. As I said, I did not check all
2^64 operand values combined all possible bt bit position arguments. I
believe I have checked all 64-bit x86 processors implementations [two
generations of Core2, NHM and WSM based Core ix, Via Nano, as well as all
Athlon64/Opteron generations).)
--
Torbjörn
- [Qemu-devel] Bug report about x86 'bt' insn, Torbjorn Granlund, 2010/11/06
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Bug report about x86 'bt' insn, malc, 2010/11/06
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Bug report about x86 'bt' insn, Torbjorn Granlund, 2010/11/06
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Bug report about x86 'bt' insn, malc, 2010/11/06
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Bug report about x86 'bt' insn, Nathan Froyd, 2010/11/06
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Bug report about x86 'bt' insn, malc, 2010/11/06
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Bug report about x86 'bt' insn, malc, 2010/11/06
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Bug report about x86 'bt' insn, Torbjorn Granlund, 2010/11/10
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Bug report about x86 'bt' insn, malc, 2010/11/10
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Bug report about x86 'bt' insn,
Torbjorn Granlund <=
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Bug report about x86 'bt' insn, malc, 2010/11/10
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Bug report about x86 'bt' insn, malc, 2010/11/10