![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 09:32:08PM -0800, Nakajima, Jun wrote: > Yes, "implementation specific" is one of the differences between > IA-32e and AMD64, i.e. that behavior is architecturally defined on > AMD64, but on IA-32e (as I posted): > Near branch with 66H prefix: > As documented in PRM the behavior is implementation specific and > should avoid using 66H prefix on near branches. Not that it really matters that much --- but I'm curious to know why Intel made this decision? It seems really dumb to make such differences when Intel is already sorely lagging behind their competitor here, I would think given the circumstances Intel would try to be as compatible as possible on all fronts. I'd almost be nervous about getting an IA-32e CPU right now given that the AMD64 chips work just fine, have had lots of testing and there is plenty of code out there which is *known* to work reliably. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:01 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||