From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=36347 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PEoLP-0000wy-6b for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 06 Nov 2010 15:22:32 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PEoLO-00062c-0w for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 06 Nov 2010 15:22:31 -0400 Received: from fe02x03-cgp.akado.ru ([77.232.31.165]:53412 helo=akado.ru) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PEoLN-00062S-RC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 06 Nov 2010 15:22:29 -0400 Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2010 22:22:22 +0300 (MSK) From: malc Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Bug report about x86 'bt' insn In-Reply-To: <20101106185932.GB26083@nightcrawler> Message-ID: References: <86eiay344b.fsf@shell.gmplib.org> <86wroqmhso.fsf@shell.gmplib.org> <20101106185932.GB26083@nightcrawler> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Nathan Froyd Cc: Torbjorn Granlund , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Sat, 6 Nov 2010, Nathan Froyd wrote: > On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 07:24:39PM +0100, Torbjorn Granlund wrote: > > malc writes: > > > > ZF is undefined according to AMD's 24594.pdf page 69. > > > > Ah, you're right. It seems that all existing x86 implementations leave > > ZF alone, though. (I am not arguing that qeum is broken, the bug is in > > my code.) > > FWIW, the Intel manuals (253666, June 2010) state that the ZF flag is > unaffected, not just undefined. (3-94 Vol. 2A BT it Test) Flags Affected The CF flag contains the value of the selected bit. The OF, SF, ZF, AF, and PF flags are undefined. -- mailto:av1474@comtv.ru