Things I learned while writing an x86 emulator (2023)
1–10 of 135 posts
Re: Things I learned while writing an x86 emulator (2023)
#2Prior discussion here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34636699
Cannot believe it’s been 16months. How time flies.
Re: Things I learned while writing an x86 emulator (2023)
#3Check out Justine Tunney and her emulator. https://justine.lol/blinkenlights/
The docs are an amazing tour of how the cpu works.
Re: Things I learned while writing an x86 emulator (2023)
#4What a cool person. I really enjoy writing assembly, it feels so simple and I really enjoy the vertical aesthetic quality.
The closest I've ever come to something like OP (which is to say, not close at all) was when I was trying to help my JS friend understand the stack, and we ended up writing a mini vm with its own little ISA: https://gist.github.com/darighost/2d880fe27510e0c90f75680bfe...
This could have gone much deeper - i'd have enjoyed that, but doing so would have detracted from the original educational goal lol. I should contact that friend and see if he still wants to study with me. it's hard since he's making so much money doing fancy web dev, he has no time to go deep into stuff. whereas my unemployed ass is basically an infinite ocean of time and energy.
Re: Things I learned while writing an x86 emulator (2023)
#5I've written fast emulators for a dozen non-toy architectures and a few JIT translators for a few as well. x86 still gives me PTSD. I have never seen a messier architecture. There is history, and a reason for it, but still ... damn
Re: Things I learned while writing an x86 emulator (2023)
#6I've written fast emulators for a dozen non-toy architectures and a few JIT translators for a few as well. x86 still gives me PTSD. I have never seen a messier architecture. There is history, and a reason for it, but still ... damn
Haha, man, I feel you :DD
You probably should have started with it from the very beginning :D
Re: Things I learned while writing an x86 emulator (2023)
#7I've written fast emulators for a dozen non-toy architectures and a few JIT translators for a few as well. x86 still gives me PTSD. I have never seen a messier architecture. There is history, and a reason for it, but still ... damn
> I have never seen a messier architecture.
Itanium. Pretty much every time I open up the manual, I find a new thing that makes me go "what the hell were you guys thinking!?" without even trying to.
Re: Things I learned while writing an x86 emulator (2023)
#8Haha! Writing an x86 emulator! I still remember writing a toy emulator which was able to execute something around the first 1000-ish lines of a real bios (and then it stuck or looped when it started to access ports or so, can't remember it was too long ago and I didn't continue it as I started to get into DirectX and modern c++ more).
Re: Things I learned while writing an x86 emulator (2023)
#9I've written fast emulators for a dozen non-toy architectures and a few JIT translators for a few as well. x86 still gives me PTSD. I have never seen a messier architecture. There is history, and a reason for it, but still ... damn
Studying the x86 architecture is kind of like studying languages with lots of irregularities and vestigial bits, and with competing grammatical paradigms, e.g. French. Other architectures, like RISC-V and ARMv8, are much more consistent.
Re: Things I learned while writing an x86 emulator (2023)
#10Bonus quirk: there's BSF/BSR, for which the Intel SDM states that on zero input, the destination has an undefined value. (AMD documents that the destination is not modified in that case.) And then there's glibc, which happily uses the undocumented fact that the destination is also unmodified on Intel [1]. It took me quite some time to track down the issue in my binary translator. (There's also TZCNT/LZCNT, which is BSF/BSR encoded with F3-prefix -- which is silently ignored on older processors not supporting the extension. So the same code will behave differently on different CPUs. At least, that's documented.)
Encoding: People often complain about prefixes, but IMHO, that's by far not the worst thing. It is well known and somewhat well documented. There are worse quirks: For example, REX/VEX/EVEX.RXB extension bits are ignored when they do not apply (e.g., MMX registers); except for mask registers (k0-k7), where they trigger #UD -- also fine -- except if the register is encoded in ModRM.rm, in which case the extension bit is ignored again.
APX takes the number of quirks to a different level: the REX2 prefix can encode general-purpose registers r16-r31, but not xmm16-xmm31; the EVEX prefix has several opcode-dependent layouts; and the extension bits for a register used depend on the register type (XMM registers use X3:B3:rm and V4:X3:idx; GP registers use B4:B3:rm, X4:X3:idx). I can't give a complete list yet, I still haven't finished my APX decoder after a year...