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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: jmerkey@ns1.utah-nac.org
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- References:
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Gerd Knorr <kraxel@suse.de>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Gerd Knorr <kraxel@suse.de>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Gerd Knorr <kraxel@suse.de>
- [RFC] SMP alternatives
- From: Gerd Knorr <kraxel@suse.de>
- [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Gerd Knorr <kraxel@suse.de>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: "Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com>
- 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):
![]() |