Re: [PATCH] APM support doesn't compile with binutils 2.8.1.0.24

H. J. Lu (hjl@freya.yggdrasil.com)
Wed, 25 Mar 1998 11:47:37 -0800 (PST)

>
>
> On Wed, 25 Mar 1998, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > So I think the APM bios access code is actually correct in specifying a
> > "l" on the push/pop operations.
>
> pushl %ds has better alignment and it pairs better with other 32-bit
> instructions. pushl %%ds does zero-extend. movl %%ds, %%eax does
> zero-extend as well, so the behavior seems to be symmetric. (i've just
> tested this to be sure ;).
>

Can someone please tell me the correct opcode for "pushl %ds"
and by what increment esp is changed by "pushl %ds"?

Thanks.

-- 
H.J. Lu (hjl@gnu.ai.mit.edu)


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu