[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [rtl] Problems with RDTSC examples posted here recently

To: <rtl@fsmlabs.com>
Subject: Re: [rtl] Problems with RDTSC examples posted here recently
From: John Regehr <regehr@cs.utah.edu>
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 08:45:59 -0700 (MST)
In-Reply-To: <200111020948.fA29mTR26983@hofr.at>

> if you compile method1 and method2A and look at the assembler coee they are
> absolutly the same - the only difference on the source level is that its easier
> to read "mov" than "0x31" thats all.

".byte 0x0f 0x31" is a synonym for "rdtsc" - look at your disassembly
again.  It's what we used in the bad old days when GNU assembler didn't
understand the rdtsc mnemonic.  The "mov" is spurious and harmful.

John

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [rtl] Problems with RDTSC examples posted here recently
  - From: Der Herr Hofrat <der.herr@hofr.at>

References:
- Re: [rtl] Problems with RDTSC examples posted here recently
  - From: Der Herr Hofrat <der.herr@hofr.at>

Prev by Date: Re: [rtl] unresolved symbols and kernel libraries
Next by Date: Re: [rtl] Problems with RDTSC examples posted here recently
Prev by thread: Re: [rtl] Problems with RDTSC examples posted here recently
Next by thread: Re: [rtl] Problems with RDTSC examples posted here recently
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread