On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 09:13:49AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> We are expecting address to be 0x1001 - 1 == 0x1000. But, what we get > >> is 0x1000 + 0xffffffff, not 0x1000 since 0x67 address prefix only applies > >> to > >> base register to zero-extend 0xffffffff to 64bit. > > > > I would call this a bug in the specification - I guess that > > 0x1001(%eax) works correctly. > > This is how hardware works.
Do you really need to use addr32 prefixes for the direct TLS seg refs? Without that the addresses will be sign-extended from the 32-bit immediate (which is used in LP64 x86_64 code too) and everything will work fine, won't it? Jakub