14 Jul
2015
14 Jul
'15
10:15 p.m.
On 7/14/15 9:53 PM, Fred Cisin wrote:
Haven't. The SDM covers Pentium forward (and even then it attempts to
document the differences between the different models). I think
anything prior to
that has been relegated to "incompatible" prior products if their
behavior is
different from what is described.
The 8086/8088 were done in a similar vein to the 8080 and 8008. Not too
much attention was paid to forward looking architectural decisions. The
80386
and follow on CPUs *tried* to look forward a bit but it wasn't really
serious until
the Pentium when features such as the TSC and APIC were introduced.
TTFN - Guy
>> The
8086 had four segment registers:
>> CS - Code segment, used with IP register
>> DS - Data segment
>> SS - Stack segment, used with SP and BP registers
>> ES - Extra segment, used with DI for string instructions as
>> destination (DS:SI as source)
>> You could override instructions dealing with memory with any of the
>> segment registers:
> If you were writing an emulator, what would you have it do if an
> interrupt occurred while in a REP operation with a segment override?
> Just how accurately should an emulator match the behavior of the
> emulated processor?
On Tue, 14 Jul 2015, Guy Sotomayor wrote:
It's actually described in the Intel SDM
(Software Developer's
Manual). ;-)
The start of the instruction is actually the segment override (one of
the things that makes decoding x86 instructions hard). Since the REP
XXX instructions are interruptible, the IP does not move to the next
instruction until after it completes (and the state of the REP XXX
instruction is kept in various registers that are updated on each
iteration).
So, when an interrupt occurs, the execution is stopped (after the
current
iteration completes) and is restarted when the interrupt returns.
That certainly sounds reasonable, but,
have you noticed the difference in behavior of 8086/8088 V 80386?