Because I'm anal. The trouble is that intel has changed the semantics of
"pushl %esp" before. It's a fundamentally flawed thing to do, as it's not
clear whether the pushed value is the one that was active before the
instruction or the decremented one.
I think intel documents that they push the value before the instruction,
and it would be fine to do what you say. But now you know why I didn't
write it that way..
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html