Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 29 Jun 2012 10:42:09 +0300
From:      Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org>
To:        src-committers@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r237748 - in head/sys/cddl/dev/dtrace: amd64 i386
Message-ID:  <4FED5C51.9060603@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <201206290735.q5T7ZbSk026312@svn.freebsd.org>
References:  <201206290735.q5T7ZbSk026312@svn.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 29/06/2012 10:35 Andriy Gapon said the following:
> Author: avg
> Date: Fri Jun 29 07:35:37 2012
> New Revision: 237748
> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/237748
> 
> Log:
>   dtrace instruction decoder: add 0x0f 0x1f NOP opcode support
>   
>   According to the AMD manual the whole range from 0x09 to 0x1f are NOPs.
>   Intel manual mentions only 0x1f.  Use only Intel one for now, it seems
>   to be the one actually generated by compilers.
>   Use gdb mnemonic for the operation: "nopw".

BTW, here I have a patch that brings our copy of dtrace dis_tables.c to the
latest version available in OpenSolaris code:
http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/dtrace-disassm-osol.diff

I haven't studied at all what the newer code brings in, but it must be some
fixes and improvements, I guess :-)
The change is mostly a mechanical merge, plus some changes on top to get the
code to compile.
I've been using the code for a few weeks and haven't run into any problems.

Should I put this change into the tree?

-- 
Andriy Gapon





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FED5C51.9060603>