Viewing profile — jxors
jxors
HN member- Joined
- Fri, Oct 25, 2024, 2:35 PM UTC
- HN karma
- 8
- Public activity
- 9 items
- HN profile
- View on Hacker News ↗
About jxors
No profile information was provided.
Recent public activity
-
comment
Comment #46967746
The memory operand version tends to be as slow or slower than the manual implementation, so LLVM is right to avoid it.
-
comment
Comment #46694267
This is indeed a thing. I believe in general instructions are executed slower when there are more than 4 legacy prefixes. And there are plenty of other timing differences between d…
-
comment
Comment #46694207
It must be the rightmost prefix among the prefixes. It also can't be repeated, unlike all other prefixes
-
comment
Comment #46694082
> Some instructions require VEX.L or VEX.W to be 0 or 1, and some encodings result in completely different instructions if you change VEX.L. There is even an instruction where AMD …
-
comment
Comment #46690562
This flowchart hides the most awful parts (IMO) of x86 prefixes: some combinations of prefixes are invalid but still parsed and executed, like combining two segment overrides, or p…
-
comment
Comment #46127667
> However, in this case it doesn’t matter; those top bits are discarded when the result is written to the 32-bit eax. Fun (but useless) fact: This being x86, of course there are at…
-
comment
Comment #41962986
Evaluating how much of instruction space we cover was indeed difficult. Initially, we wanted to parse Intel XED's datafiles to generate a map of valid instruction space, but we end…
-
comment
Comment #41962768
Not a dumb question at all! Documentation is definitely not one of x86's strengths. Other architectures do much better. For example, ARM provides formal models of their CPUs, and R…
-
comment
Comment #41946446
Hi! I'm one of the authors. Cool to see our work show up on HN! I'm happy to answer questions if there are any.