Re: Simple x86 assembler question

2001-10-28 Thread Sergey Babkin
Matthew Emmerton wrote: Hi all, This weekend I decided to do some assembly hacking on some object-only code that I've lost the C source for. Since I haven't coded assembler for at least 8 years, and I threw my x86 assembly manuals out when I moved 6 months ago, there are a few things

Re: Simple x86 assembler question

2001-10-28 Thread Seth Kingsley
On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 07:08:58PM -0400, Matthew Emmerton wrote: In particular, am I interpreting these instructions correctly? 0x80839fb uttstrbyt+43: movzbl (%edx,%eax,1),%eax Takes %eax + %edx, obtains the byte value in memory at that address, zero-extends and places into %eax

RE: Simple x86 assembler question

2001-10-28 Thread John Baldwin
On 27-Oct-01 Matthew Emmerton wrote: Hi all, This weekend I decided to do some assembly hacking on some object-only code that I've lost the C source for. Since I haven't coded assembler for at least 8 years, and I threw my x86 assembly manuals out when I moved 6 months ago, there are a

Re: Simple x86 assembler question

2001-10-28 Thread David O'Brien
On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 09:21:33AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: Almost. The '2' there is a multiplier on (I think) %eax, so it uses 'ebx + 2 * eax + 0xe90' for the memory address. Either that or 'eax + 2 * ebx + 0xe90'. Check the gas info page for the ATT syntax to figure out exactly which.

Simple x86 assembler question

2001-10-27 Thread Matthew Emmerton
Hi all, This weekend I decided to do some assembly hacking on some object-only code that I've lost the C source for. Since I haven't coded assembler for at least 8 years, and I threw my x86 assembly manuals out when I moved 6 months ago, there are a few things that are stumping me. In