| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Incomplete implementation of `xchg` since commit 4175.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
subx: extract helpers for 'push' and 'pop'. We will be using them in
'call' and 'ret' as well.
|
|
|
|
| |
subx: 'pop'
|
|
|
|
|
| |
subx: correct a 'copy' ('mov') instruction as well to get its operand
right from the opcode.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
subx: correct 'push' register. It gets its operand right from the
opcode, not a new modrm byte.
Have I misinterpreted any other instructions in this manner (`+rd` in
the Intel manual)?
|
|
|
|
| |
subx: 'pop'
|
|
|
|
| |
subx: 'mov'
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I spent a while spelunking into the code generated by C compilers before
realizing that ignoring the order of arguments for 'cmp' instructions
clarifies everything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
subx: 'compare'
Hopefully I've implemented the 'sense' of comparisons right..
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
subx: 'or'
|
|
|
|
| |
subx: Implement 'and' for the addressing modes we've built so far.
|
|
subx: Move register direct mode before indirect in the exposition.
|