On Wed, 23 Nov 2005, Jeff V. Merkey wrote: > > The lock prefix '0F' is used for a lot of opcodes other than "lock". Go check > the instruction set reference. No it's not. 0F is indeed the two-byte prefix. But lock is F0, and it's unique. Sometimes Intel re-uses the prefixes for other things eg "rep nop", but I don't think that has ever happened for the lock prefix. Besides, the instructions look very different internally in the CPU after decoding, and anyway you'd not want to ignore the lock prefix _early_ at decode time anyway (many instructions turn into illegal instructions with a lock prefix, as do reg-reg modrm bytes). So you'd dismiss the lock prefix not at a byte level, but at a minimum just after the decode stage. Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Gerd Knorr <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Gerd Knorr <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Gerd Knorr <[email protected]>
- [RFC] SMP alternatives
- From: Gerd Knorr <[email protected]>
- [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Gerd Knorr <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: "Jeff V. Merkey" <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- Prev by Date: Re: [RESEND 2/2] - usbserial: race-condition fix.
- Next by Date: Re: [spi-devel-general] Re: SPI
- Previous by thread: Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- Next by thread: Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- Index(es):
 |