I've been optimising/benchmarking some code recently and came across this method:This is called from a performance critical loop elsewhere, so I naturally assumed all those typeof(...) calls were adding unnecessary overhead (a micro-optimisation, I know) and could be moved to private fields within the class. (I'm aware there are better...
I was self-studying CSAPP and got a strange result when I ran into a strange issue during the run of a assertion test.
I am disassembling this code on llvm clang Apple LLVM version 8.0.0 (clang-800.0.42.1):I compiled with no -O specifications, but I also tried with -O0 (gives the same) and -O2 (actually computes the value and stores it precomputed)
I was wondering if it is possible to decode x86-64 instructions in reverse?I need this for a runtime dissembler. Users can point to a random location in memory and then should be able to scroll upwards and see what instructions came before the specified address.
Consider the following definition of Foo:Now, consider the following definition of Bar, which has the same data member as Foo, but has an empty user-declared destructor:
Valgrind picked up a flurry Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s) in one of my unit tests.
Question: I'm looking for the best way to clear the lowest non-zero bit of a unsigned atomic like std::atomic_uint64_t in a threadsafe fashion without using an extra mutex or the like. In addition, I also need to know, which bit got cleared.
I am attempting to use a 64-bits integral as a bitmap, and acquire/release ownership of individual bits, atomically.
How Get arguments value using inline assembly in C without Glibc?i require this code for Linux archecture x86_64 and i386. if you know about MAC OS X or Windows , also submit and please guide.
I'm trying to understand the relationship between C language system calls API, syscall assembler instruction and the exception mechanism (interrupts) used to switch contexts between processes. There's a lot to study out on my own, so please bear with me.