Comment 10 for bug 1843394

Revision history for this message
Christian Ehrhardt  (paelzer) wrote :

Summary D vs E:
- no suffix
  => works equally in both releases
  => same opcodes in all .code segments
- suffix "w"
  => works equally in both releases
  => opcodes in .code32/.code64 differ from .code16 (660f..)
  => .code16 matches the non-suffix opcodes (0f..)
- suffix "l"
  => failures in Disco, works in Eoan
  => .code16 opcodes match the non-.code16 of the "w" suffix (660f..)
  => .code32/.code64 are back to the base opcode (0f..)
  => If I remove the failing .code64 from disco then .code16/.code32 is the same as in Eoan
- suffix "q"
  => different failures in Disco and Eoan
  => in Disco .code16/.code32 fails
  => in Disco .code64 generates the basic opcode (0f..)
  => in Eoan all three .code segments fail

Therefore it seems this part had major changes.
Not sure what to do, is this a bug in binutils that needs to be fixed?
Or was it a bug in IPXE that now is exposed?

I'd appreciate help by binutils-people.
@Doko when you read that you might ask some of your contacts maybe?