On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 22:57:30 +, Julian Pidancet wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-03-07 at 17:54:57 +, Julian Pidancet wrote:
> > > So according to the manual, it should be BP, not EBP.
> >
> > The register being decreased should match the one
Some instructions are not emulated correctly by x86emu when they
are prefixed by the 0x66 opcode.
I've identified problems in the emulation of these intructions: ret,
enter, leave, iret and some forms of call.
Most of the time, the problem is that these instructions should push or
pop 32-bit value
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-03-07 at 17:54:57 +, Julian Pidancet wrote:
>> So according to the manual, it should be BP, not EBP.
>
> The register being decreased should match the one being used to address
> the stack, and the one to use depends on the de
On Wed, 2012-03-07 at 17:54:57 +, Julian Pidancet wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 17:49:08 +, Julian Pidancet wrote:
> >> diff --git a/hw/xfree86/x86emu/ops.c b/hw/xfree86/x86emu/ops.c
> >> index 5d3cac1..440b8dc 100644
> >> --- a/hw/
Hi!
On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 17:49:08 +, Julian Pidancet wrote:
> diff --git a/hw/xfree86/x86emu/ops.c b/hw/xfree86/x86emu/ops.c
> index 5d3cac1..440b8dc 100644
> --- a/hw/xfree86/x86emu/ops.c
> +++ b/hw/xfree86/x86emu/ops.c
> @@ -8787,11 +8795,16 @@ static void x86emuOp_enter(u8 X86EMU_UNUSED(op
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-03-07 at 17:54:57 +, Julian Pidancet wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Guillem Jover wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 17:49:08 +, Julian Pidancet wrote:
>> >> diff --git a/hw/xfree86/x86emu/ops.c b/hw/xfree86/x86
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 17:49:08 +, Julian Pidancet wrote:
>> diff --git a/hw/xfree86/x86emu/ops.c b/hw/xfree86/x86emu/ops.c
>> index 5d3cac1..440b8dc 100644
>> --- a/hw/xfree86/x86emu/ops.c
>> +++ b/hw/xfree86/x86emu/ops.c
>> @@ -87
On 03/05/12 15:51, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Julian Pidancet wrote:
>> Sorry for the noise. None of these emails got through to the
>> xorg-devel mailing list. Will retry later.
>
> I would appreciate if you looked at the coreboot x86emu as well.
>
> http://review.coreboot.org/gitweb?p=coreboot.git;a=
Julian Pidancet wrote:
> Sorry for the noise. None of these emails got through to the
> xorg-devel mailing list. Will retry later.
I would appreciate if you looked at the coreboot x86emu as well.
http://review.coreboot.org/gitweb?p=coreboot.git;a=tree;f=src/devices/oprom/x86emu
//Peter
___
Sorry for the noise. None of these emails got through to the
xorg-devel mailing list. Will retry later.
--
Julian
___
SeaBIOS mailing list
SeaBIOS@seabios.org
http://www.seabios.org/mailman/listinfo/seabios
Some instructions are not emulated correctly by x86emu when they
are prefixed by the 0x66 opcode.
I've identified problems in the emulation of these intructions: ret,
enter, leave, iret and some forms of call.
Most of the time, the problem is that these instructions should push or
pop 32-bit value
11 matches
Mail list logo
