[9fans] cmovne

[9fans] cmovne

[erik quanstrom]

am i reading the intel docs wrong, or is 6l missing a valid instruction?

memmove5: doasm: notfound from=12 to=92 (47)	CMOVQNE	DX,(DI)

- erik

Re: [9fans] cmovne

[Don Bailey]

Technically, there are a few instructions that the 9 compilers miss. This is generally handled by the BYTE directive (see the asm manual). 

Alternatively, adding a new instruction to the lexer/etc is fairly trivial. See diffs between vc and kc, for example. 

D



> On Feb 8, 2015, at 4:27 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
> 
> am i reading the intel docs wrong, or is 6l missing a valid instruction?
> 
> memmove5: doasm: notfound from=12 to=92 (47)    CMOVQNE    DX,(DI)
> 
> - erik
> 

Re: [9fans] cmovne

[erik quanstrom]

On Sun Feb  8 15:31:26 PST 2015, don.bailey@gmail.com wrote:
> Technically, there are a few instructions that the 9 compilers miss.
> This is generally handled by the BYTE directive (see the asm manual).
>
> Alternatively, adding a new instruction to the lexer/etc is fairly
> trivial.  See diffs between vc and kc, for example.

you can't actually sneak around the linker with BYTE.  try it, you'll see.

i've added many instructions to the various compilers.  i'm just double checking
that it is indeed a valid instruction.  the manual says it is, but that's subject
to my reading comprehension.  :-)

- erik

Re: [9fans] cmovne

[erik quanstrom]

> On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 6:27 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
> wrote:
>
> > am i reading the intel docs wrong, or is 6l missing a valid instruction?
> >
> > memmove5: doasm: notfound from=12 to=92 (47)    CMOVQNE DX,(DI)
> >
> Go's liblink (which is derived from [5869]l) and cmd/6a support this
> instruction.

does it support it with exactly that register combination?

- erik

Re: [9fans] cmovne

[minux]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 315 bytes --]

On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 6:27 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
wrote:

> am i reading the intel docs wrong, or is 6l missing a valid instruction?
>
> memmove5: doasm: notfound from=12 to=92 (47)    CMOVQNE DX,(DI)
>
Go's liblink (which is derived from [5869]l) and cmd/6a support this
instruction.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 683 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] cmovne

[minux]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 978 bytes --]

On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 6:42 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
wrote:

> > On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 6:27 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
> > wrote:
> > > am i reading the intel docs wrong, or is 6l missing a valid
> instruction?
> > > memmove5: doasm: notfound from=12 to=92 (47)    CMOVQNE DX,(DI)> >
> > Go's liblink (which is derived from [5869]l) and cmd/6a support this
> > instruction.
> does it support it with exactly that register combination?
>
No. I just realized you want conditional move from DX to (DI).

It's an illegal combination. The intel document only lists three forms for
CMOVNE:
CMOVNE r16, r/m16 // CMOVWNE
CMOVNE r32, r/m32 // CMOVLNE
CMOVNE r64, r/m64 // CMOVQNE

All of them are conditionally moving from reg/mem to a register.
(Also note the description "These instructions can move 16-bit, 32-bit or
64-bit values
from memory to a general-purpose register or from one general-purpose
register to another.")

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1580 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] cmovne

[erik quanstrom]

> No. I just realized you want conditional move from DX to (DI).
>
> It's an illegal combination. The intel document only lists three forms for
> CMOVNE:
> CMOVNE r16, r/m16 // CMOVWNE
> CMOVNE r32, r/m32 // CMOVLNE
> CMOVNE r64, r/m64 // CMOVQNE
>
> All of them are conditionally moving from reg/mem to a register.
> (Also note the description "These instructions can move 16-bit, 32-bit or
> 64-bit values
> from memory to a general-purpose register or from one general-purpose
> register to another.")

d'oh!

ah!  thanks.  i tripped over intel listing the arguments in the other order.
glad i asked.

- erik

Re: [9fans] cmovne

[Don Bailey]

Ahh gotcha. 



> On Feb 8, 2015, at 4:37 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
> 
>> On Sun Feb  8 15:31:26 PST 2015, don.bailey@gmail.com wrote:
>> Technically, there are a few instructions that the 9 compilers miss.
>> This is generally handled by the BYTE directive (see the asm manual).
>> 
>> Alternatively, adding a new instruction to the lexer/etc is fairly
>> trivial.  See diffs between vc and kc, for example.
> 
> you can't actually sneak around the linker with BYTE.  try it, you'll see.
> 
> i've added many instructions to the various compilers.  i'm just double checking
> that it is indeed a valid instruction.  the manual says it is, but that's subject
> to my reading comprehension.  :-)
> 
> - erik
>