binutils-gdb/ld/testsuite/ld-i386/plt.pd
Jan Beulich 36938cabf0 x86: avoid attaching suffixes to unambiguous insns
"Unambiguous" is is in particular taking as reference the assembler,
which also accepts certain insns - despite them allowing for varying
operand size, and hence in principle being ambiguous - without any
suffix. For example, from the very beginning of the life of x86-64 I had
trouble understanding why a plain and simple RET had to be printed as
RETQ. In case someone really used the 16-bit form, RETW disambiguates
the two quite fine.
2020-07-15 08:53:55 +02:00

25 lines
651 B
Plaintext

#source: plt.s
#as: --32
#ld: -melf_i386
#objdump: -drj.plt
#target: i?86-*-*
.*: +file format .*
Disassembly of section .plt:
[0-9a-f]+ <.plt>:
+[0-9a-f]+: ff 35 ([0-9a-f]{2} ){4} * push 0x[0-9a-f]+
+[0-9a-f]+: ff 25 ([0-9a-f]{2} ){4} * jmp \*0x[0-9a-f]+
#...
[0-9a-f]+ <fn1@plt>:
+[0-9a-f]+: ff 25 ([0-9a-f]{2} ){4} * jmp \*0x[0-9a-f]+
+[0-9a-f]+: 68 00 00 00 00 push \$0x0
+[0-9a-f]+: e9 ([0-9a-f]{2} ){4} * jmp [0-9a-f]+ <.plt>
[0-9a-f]+ <fn2@plt>:
+[0-9a-f]+: ff 25 ([0-9a-f]{2} ){4} * jmp \*0x[0-9a-f]+
+[0-9a-f]+: 68 08 00 00 00 push \$0x8
+[0-9a-f]+: e9 ([0-9a-f]{2} ){4} * jmp [0-9a-f]+ <.plt>